Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 152 F.3d 304 - Koehler v. Dodwell

Koehler v. Dodwell’s Empirical Analysis

152 F.3d 304 · 1998

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
6
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

20 federal appellate · 7 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 69 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2019 · most notably Carefirst of Maryland, Inc. v. Carefirst Pregnancy Centers, Inc. (2003), JPMorgan Chase Bank v. Traffic Stream (BVI) Infrastructure Ltd. (2002)

20 federal appellate · 7 district · 7 state decisions

340199820002010decided

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 Ross v. Bernhard · Navarro Savings Assn. v. Lee · Smith v. Sperling · United States v. O'Neil · Nichols III II v. Gd Searle & Company

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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) the freedom to send judicial documents, by postal channels, directly to persons abroad, (b) the freedom of judicial officers, officials, or other competent persons of the State of origin to effect service of judicial documents directly through the judicial officers, officials, or other competent persons of the State of destination, (c)the freedom of any person interested in a judicial proceeding to effect service of judicial documents directly through the judicial officers, officials or other competent persons of the State of destination.” 20 U.S.T. 362, Art. 10. As with Article 8, contracting states may choose to object to this provision pursuant to Article 21. 20 U.S.T. 362, Art. 21”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “cannot be made a party, the court shall determine whether in equity and good conscience the action should proceed among the parties before it, or should be dismissed, the absent person being thus regarded as indispensable.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[w]ith reference to the provisions of paragraph[ ] ... (c) of Article 10 of the Convention, documents sent for service through official channels will be accepted in [inter alia, Bermuda] by the designated authority and only from judicial, consular or diplomatic officers of other Contracting States.”
    2 later decisions 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.