Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 16 F. Supp. 2d 319 - Karabu Corp. v. Gitner

16 F. Supp. 2d 319 - Karabu Corp. v. Gitner’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
1
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably 425 F. Supp. 2d 402 - Merck & Co. v. Mediplan Health Consulting, Inc. (2006), 218 F. Supp. 2d 369 - First Capital Asset Management, Inc. v. Brickellbush, Inc. (2002)

3 district · 1 state decisions

140199820002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441

Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. Hall · Milliken v. Meyer · Shaffer v. Heitner · Kulko v. Superior Court of California in and for City and County of San Francisco

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

  1. “[F]or a corporation to be considered an agent of an officer for personal jurisdiction purposes, a plaintiff must allege: (1) that the corporation engaged in purposeful activities in New York in relation to the transaction; (2) that the corporation’s activities were performed for the benefit of the individual defendant; (3) that the corporation’s activities were performed with the knowledge and consent of the individual defendant; and (4) that the individual defendant exercised some control over the corporation.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “a plaintiff's allegations must sufficiently detail the defendant's conduct so as to persuade a court that the defendant was a 'primary actor' in the specific matter in question; control cannot be shown based merely upon a defendant's title or position within the corporation, or upon conclusory allegations that the defendant controls the corporation.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “have ... routinely granted 12(b) (2) motions for lack of personal jurisdiction where the plaintiff made only broadly worded and vague allegations about a defendant's participation in the specific matter at hand.”
    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.