Blaski v. Hoffman’s Empirical Analysis
260 F.2d 317 · 1958
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 39 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2018 · most notably Hoffman v. Blaski (1960), In re Korean Air Lines Disaster of September 1, 1983 (1987)
24 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Relies on Norwood v. Kirkpatrick · Fourco Glass Company v. Transmirra Products Corporation · Collett Kitpatrick v. Texas and Pacific Railway Co · Stonite Products Co. v. Melvin Lloyd Co. · In re Josephson
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 39 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“and it is immaterial that the defendant subsequently acquiesces. The test is, did the plaintiff have an independent right to commence suit in the district to which it is sought to make transfer? If so, it is a district”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘If when a suit is commenced, plaintiff has a right to sue in that district, independently of the wishes of defendant, it is a district “where (the action) might have been brought.’ If he does not have that right, independently of the wishes of the defendant, it is not a district ‘where it might have been brought,’ and it is immaterial that the defendant subsequently (makes himself subject by consent, waiver of venue and personal jurisdiction defenses or otherwise, to the jurisdiction of some other forum).’”
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.