155 F. Supp. 2d 692 - Eplus Technology, Inc. v. Aboud’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Pioneer Investment Services Company v. Brunswick Associates Limited Partnership · United States v. Turkette · United Sav. Assn. of Tex. v. Timbers of Inwood Forest Associates, Ltd. · Food & Drug Administration v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Provided the State of destination does not object, the present Convention shall not interfere with— 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.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“allow[s] only those methods of service explicitly sanctioned by the contracting state.”
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.