Lakin v. Prudential Securities, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
348 F.3d 704 · 2003
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 16 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2022 · most notably 134 S. Ct. 746 - Daimler AG v. Bauman (2014), Daimler AG v. Bauman (2014)
14 federal appellate · 16 district · 15 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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
Applies 26 U.S.C. § 163
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · Hanson v. Denckla · Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. Hall · 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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“At one end of the spectrum are situations where a defendant clearly does business over the Internet. If the defendant enters into contracts with residents of a foreign jurisdiction that involve the knowing and repeated transmission of computer files over the Internet, personal jurisdiction is proper. At the opposite end are situations where a defendant has simply posted information on an Internet Web site which is accessible to users in foreign jurisdictions. A passive Web site that does little more than make information available to those who are interested in it is not grounds for the exercise [of] personal jurisdiction. The middle ground is occupied by interactive Web sites where a user can exchange information with the host computer. In these cases, the exercise of jurisdiction is determined by examining the level of interactivity and commercial nature of the exchange of information that occurs on the Web site.”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“. . . . . . [I]t is possible for a Web site to be very interactive, but to have no quantity of contacts. In other words, the contacts would be continuous, but not substantial. This is untenable in a general jurisdiction analysis. [348 F. 3d at 712 (citation omitted).] The same observation could be made in this case. Moreover,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“1. Defendant Astromec’s Rule 12(b)(2) Motion to Dismiss For Lack of Personal Jurisdiction (Doc. No. 14) is CONTINUED UNDER ADVISEMENT. 2. Defendant Astromec’s oral Motion For Limited Jurisdictional Discovery is GRANTED and IT IS ORDERED that within sixty (60) days of this Order, the following shall occur: a. Montevideo shall have limited jurisdictional discovery of Astro-mec; 5 and b. Astromec and Montevideo shall file with the Court, and provide copies to each other, supplemental briefs of no longer than ten (10) pages in length addressing the jurisdictional discovery and the import of Lakin on this case. 3. Defendants Astromec’s and Eaton’s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss For Failure to State a Claim (Doc. No. 14) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART, as follows: Counts II (“Breach of Implied Contract: Eaton”), III (“Tortious Interference With Contract: Astromec”) and V (“Conversion”) of Montevideo’s Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 11) are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”
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.