Herrick v. GoDaddy.com LLC’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2342 · 47 U.S.C. § 227 · 47 U.S.C. § 402
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Scott v. Harris · Tw Electrical Service Inc Nn v. Pacific Electrical Contractors Association · Taylor v. List
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“qualify as an ATDS only if it can generate random or sequential numbers to be dialed”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“As a result of the D.C. Circuit's holding ... this Court will not defer to any of the FCC's 'pertinent pronouncements' regarding the first required function of an ATDS, i.e., whether a device that has the capacity to store or produce telephone numbers 'using a random or sequential number generator.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“program the numbers to be called into the equipment, and the dialer calls them at a rate to ensure that when a consumer answers the phone, a sales person is available to take the call.”
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.