Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 234 F.3d 863 - Stripling

Stripling’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

138
cited by 138 later decisions
4
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

3 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 138 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Patin, 838 So. 2d 964 - Poindexter v. Southern United Fire Ins. Co. (2003)

3 district · 7 state decisions

780200020102020decided

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 Conley v. Gibson · International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Foman v. Davis · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson

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

  1. “accept the complaint's well-pleaded facts as true and view them in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the amended complaint would fail to state a claim upon which relief could be granted.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Any nonresident person, firm, general or limited partnership, or any foreign or other corporation not qualified under the Constitution and laws of this state as to doing business herein, who shall make a contract with a resident of this state to be performed in whole or in part by any party in this state, or who shall commit a tort in whole or in part in this state against a resident or nonresident of this state, or who shall do any business or perform any character of work or service in this state, shall by such act or acts be deemed to be doing business in Mississippi and shall thereby be subjected to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state. Service of summons and process upon the defendant shall be had or made as is provided by the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure.”
    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.