Fedele v. Harris’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406 · 42 U.S.C. § 1981 (Civil Rights Act of 1866) · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · Goldlawr, Inc. v. Heiman · Davis v. Federal Election Commission
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Substantiality for venue purposes is a more qualitative than quantitative inquiry, determined by assessing the overall nature of the plaintiff's claims and the nature of the specific events or omissions in the forum, and not by simply adding up the number of contacts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he Second Circuit has cautioned district courts to take seriously the adjective 'substantial' and thus for venue to be proper, significant events or omission material to the plaintiff's claim must have occurred in the district in question.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[w]here there are some acts that took place within the plaintiff's chosen forum, they are properly deemed significant if they have a close nexus to the claim.”
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.