147 F. Supp. 2d 1069 - Ori, Inc. v. Lanewala’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
6 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“do not contend to have witnessed, overheard or otherwise experienced” the actions of a former officer; in other words, that the affi-ants lacked personal knowledge of the subject matter in their affidavits. Here, the court is satisfied that Kozisek was in a position to have at least some knowledge of the”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.