Robinson v. Government of Malaysia’s Empirical Analysis
269 F.3d 133 · 2001
Citation profile
47 federal appellate · 17 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 206 later decisions — most recently February 2025 · most notably Scherer v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States (2003), Carter v. HealthPort Technologies, LLC (2016)
47 federal appellate · 17 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.
Relationships
Relies on Mitchell v. Forsyth · Bell v. Hood · Singleton v. Wulff · Doerr v. Doerr · Verlinden B. v. v. Central Bank of Nigeria
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 206 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) A foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of courts of the United States or of the States in any case— (5) ... in which money damages are sought against a foreign state for personal injury or death, or damage to or loss of property, occurring in the United States and caused by the tortious act or omission of that foreign state or of any official or employee of that foreign state while acting within the scope of his office or employment; except this paragraph shall not apply to— (A) any claim based upon the exercise or performance or the failure to exercise or perform a discretionary function regardless of whether the discretion be abused ....”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage“[I]n assessing whether a plaintiff has sufficiently alleged or proffered evidence to support jurisdiction under the FSIA, a district court must review the allegations in the complaint, the undisputed facts, if any, placed before it by the parties, and — if the plaintiff comes forward with sufficient evidence to carry its burden of production on this issue — resolve disputed issues of fact, with the defendant foreign sovereign shouldering the burden of persuasion.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“In a motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), the defendant may challenge either the legal or factual sufficiency of the plaintiff's assertion of jurisdiction, or both.”
4 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.