Djourabchi v. Self’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
12 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 28 U.S.C. § 1391
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Foman v. Davis · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. · Kowal v. MCI Communications Corp. · Schuler v. United States
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“substantially changes the theory on which the case has been proceeding and is proposed late enough so that the opponent would be required to engage in significant new preparation”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“put [the opponent] to added expense and the burden of a more complicated and lengthy trial”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“issues ... [that] are remote from the other issues in the case.”
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.