Perkins v. CCH Computax, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently December 2023 · most notably 154 N.C. App. 639 - Cable Tel Services, Inc. v. Overland Contracting, Inc. (2002), 151 N.C. App. 565 - Mark Group International, Inc. v. Still (2002)
2 federal appellate · 35 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 M/s Bremen v. Zapata off-Shore Company · 17 Cal. 3d 491 - Smith, Valentino & Smith, Inc. v. Superior Court · Johnston County v. R. N. Rouse & Co. · 493 So. 2d 437 - Manrique v. Fabbri · Paul Business Systems, Inc. v. Canon U.S.A., Inc.
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[a] plaintiff who executes a contract that designates a particular forum for the resolution of disputes and then files suit in another forum seeking to avoid enforcement of a forum selection clause carries a heavy burden and must demonstrate that the clause was the product of fraud or unequal bargaining power or that enforcement of the clause would be unfair or unreasonable.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“clearly show that (1) enforcement would be unreasonable or unjust, (2) the clause is invalid for reasons of fraud or overreaching, (3) enforcement would contravene a strong public policy of the forum where the suit was brought, or (4) the selected forum would be seriously inconvenient for trial.”
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.