Hanson v. Denckla’s Empirical Analysis
1958
Citation profile
1,954 federal appellate · 2,247 district · 5,096 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14,236 later decisions (81 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2026 · most notably Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz (1985), World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson (1980)
1,954 federal appellate · 2,247 district · 5,096 state decisions — followed in 49 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 28 U.S.C. § 1257 · 28 U.S.C. § 1738 · 28 U.S.C. § 2103
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. · McGee v. International Life Insurance · Milliken v. Meyer
Cited together with International Shoe Co. v. Washington · McGee v. International Life Insurance · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining 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 14,236 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“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.”
843 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.”
168 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“A judgment in personam imposes a personal liability or obligation on one person in favor of another. A judgment in rem affects the interests of all persons in designated property. A judgment quasi in rem affects the interests of particular persons in designated property. The latter is of two types. In one the plaintiff is seeking to secure a pre-existing claim in the subject property and to extinguish or establish the nonexistence of similar interests of particular persons. In the other the plaintiff seeks to apply what he concedes to be the property of the defendant to the satisfaction of a claim against him.”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.