Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 355 F.2d 64 - Thomson v. Palmieri

Thomson v. Palmieri’s Empirical Analysis

355 F.2d 64 · 1966

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
1
states following
March 2017
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently March 2017 · most notably Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,657 Leasco Data Processing Equipment Corporation, Leasco World Trade Company (u.k.) Ltd. v. Robert Maxwell, Leasco Data Processing Equipment Corporation, Leasco World Trade Company (u.k.) Limited v. Isidore Kerman (1972), Alcoa Steamship Company, Inc. v. M/V Nordic Regent (1980)

13 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

160196619701980199020002010decided

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 · Gulf Oil Corporation v. Gilbert · Koster v. Lumbermens Mut Casualty Co · De Moss v. United States · Vanity Fair Mills, Inc. v. T. Eaton 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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he central question is one of convenience, and we should respect plaintiff's choice of forum as long as no harassment is intended.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(m)ost (cases that dismiss on this ground) require that the defendant be vexed and harassed by plaintiff's choice of forum. And usually the defendant was not a United States citizen or resident, and was only served because of minimal contacts with the forum.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The doctrine that a United States citizen does not have an absolute right to use United States courts usually is expressed in the context of a citizen doing business abroad expecting still to use United States courts.”
    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.