Na v. J’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
6 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2023 · most notably Wachovia Bank, National Ass'n v. Schmidt (2006), In Re Skaggs, Richard & Connie (2006)
6 district · 2 state decisions
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 Federal Deposit Insurance v. Meyer · Guaranty Trust Co. v. York · Alexander v. Sandoval · Lorillard v. Pons · Dewsnup v. Timm
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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a national bank is 'located' in, and thus a citizen of, the state of its principal place of business and the state listed in its organization certificate”). . Although Albert Feinstein is Plaintiff’s only attorney of record in this action, his”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Congress has prescribed that a corporation ‘shall be deemed to be a citizen of any State by which it has been incorporated and of the State where it has its principal place of business.’ 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (c)(1). The counterpart provision for national banking associations, § 1348, however, does not refer to ‘principal place of business’; it simply deems such associations ‘citizens of the States in which they are respectively located.’ The absence of a ‘principal place of business’ reference in § 1348 may be of scant practical significance for, in almost every case, as in this one, the location of the national bank’s main office and of its principal place of business coincide.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““[T]he jurisdiction for suits hereafter brought by or against any association established under any law providing for national-banking associations ... shall be the same as, and not other than, the jurisdiction for suits by or against banks not organized under any law of the United States which do or might do banking business where such national-banking associations may be doing business when such suits may be begun[.]” Act of July 12, 1882, §4, 22 Stat. 163 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.