Elkhart Engineering Corp. v. Werke’s Empirical Analysis
343 F.2d 861 · 1965
Citation profile
44 federal appellate · 5 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably Southern Machine Co. v. Mohasco Industries, Inc. (1968), Time, Inc. v. Manning (1966)
44 federal appellate · 5 district · 11 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 Erie Co v. Tompkins · International Shoe Co. v. Washington · New York Times Co. v. Sullivan · Hanson v. Denckla · McGee v. International Life Insurance
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Alabama may, consistent with the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, assert jurisdiction over a non-resident, non-qualifying corporation in suits on a claim of liability for tortious injury arising out of activity of the non-resident within the state, even though only a single transaction is involved, and regardless of whether the activity is considered dangerous.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the additional element that in every case ... there must be 'some act by which the defendant purposefully avails itself of the privilege of conducting activities within the forum State, thus invoking the benefits and protections of its laws.'”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"* * * In determining the question, we are not here concerned with state law, since it is not controlling. The issue is regarded in this jurisdiction as a federal question of whether subjection of the defendant to this sovereignty comports with federal due process * * * So, the question is whether appellee corporation was amenable to the jurisdiction of the court by reason of its activities in Alabama within the limitations of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the authorities governing. We look then to the federal decisions for guidance * * *"”
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.