Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 295 F.3d 485 - Msof Corporation

Msof Corporation’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
January 2022
most recently cited

3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently January 2022 · most notably MSOF CORP. v. Exxon Corp. (2005), Murray v. Motorola, Inc. (2004)

3 district · 1 state decisions

160200020102020decided

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 Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Caterpillar Inc. v. Williams · Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Thompson Ex Rel. Thompson · United States v. New York Telephone Co. · Wilson v. Republic Iron & Steel Co.

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

  1. “Nothing in this chapter shall affect or modify in any way the obligations or liabilities of any person under other Federal or State law, including common law, with respect to releases of hazardous substances or other pollutants or contaminants. The provisions of this chapter shall not be considered, interpreted, or construed in any way as reflecting a determination, in part or whole, of policy regarding the inapplicability of strict liability, or strict liability doctrines, to activities relating to haz ardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants or other such activities.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Recovery by any person ... for response costs or damages resulting from a federally permitted release shall be pursuant to existing law in lieu of this section. Nothing in this paragraph shall affect or modify in any way the obligations or liability of any person under any other provision of State or Federal law, including common law, for damages, injury, or loss resulting from a release of any hazardous substance or for removal or remedial action of such hazardous substance.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Suits for violation of contracts between an employer and a labor organization representing employees in an industry affecting commerce as defined in this chapter, or between any such labor organizations, may be brought in any district court of the United States having jurisdiction of the parties, without respect to the amount in controversy or without regard to the citizenship of the parties.”
    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.