Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 13 Mass. App. Ct. 158 - Burtner v. Burnham

13 Mass. App. Ct. 158 - Burtner v. Burnham’s Empirical Analysis

1982

Citation profile

39
cited by 39 later decisions
2
states following
September 2015
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 8 district · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 39 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Ticketmaster-New York, Inc. v. Alioto (1994), Ealing Corp. v. Harrods Ltd. (1986)

10 federal appellate · 8 district · 21 state decisions

1301982199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Nader v. Citron · Whitinsville Plaza, Inc. v. Kotseas · Good Hope Industries, Inc. v. Ryder Scott Co. · Slaney v. Westwood Auto, Inc. · "Automatic" Sprinkler Corp. of America v. Seneca Foods Corp.

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Where a defendant knowingly sends into a state a false statement, intending that it should there be relied upon to the injury of a resident of that state, he has, for jurisdictional purposes, acted within that state. The element of intent also persuades us that there can be no constitutional objection to Massachusetts asserting jurisdiction over the out-of-state sender of a fraudulent misrepresentation, for such a sender has thereby “purposefully availed itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum State, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “c.223A, § 3, asserts jurisdiction over the person to the constitutional limit only when some basis for jurisdiction enumerated in the statute has been established.''). 12 . The Court stated that the Maryland long-arm statute”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the frequently hypothesized but rarely encountered gunman firing across a state line.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.