Chenault v. Walker’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 22 state decisions

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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The cases are unanimous that a bare allegation of a conspiracy between the defendant and a person within the personal jurisdiction of the court is not enough. Otherwise plaintiffs could drag defendants to remote forums for protracted proceedings even though there were grave reasons for questioning whether the defendant was actually sua-ble in those forums.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Law Offices of Hugo Harmatz v. Dorrough · First Community Bank, N.A. v. First Tennessee Bank, N.A.

2. “(a) Persons who are nonresidents of Tennessee and residents of Tennessee who are outside the state and cannot be personally served with process within the state are subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state as to any action or claim for relief arising from: (1) The transaction of any business within the state; (2) Any tortious act or omission within this state; (3) The ownership or possession of any interest in property located within this state; (4) Entering into any contract of insurance, indemnity, or guaranty covering any person, property, or risk, located within this state at the time of contracting; (5) Entering into a contract for services to be rendered or for materials to be furnished in this state; (6) Any basis not inconsistent with the constitution of this state or 'of the United States; (7) Any action of divorce, annulment or separate maintenance where the parties lived in the marital relationship within this state, notwithstanding one party's subsequent departure from this state, as to all obligations arising for alimony, custody, child support, or marital dissolution agreement, if the other party to the marital relationship continues to reside in this state.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Kelly v. International Capital Resources, Inc. · Law Offices of Hugo Harmatz v. Dorrough

3. “combination between two or more persons to accomplish by concert an unlawful purpose or to accomplish a purpose not in itself unlawful by unlawful means.” Brown v. Birman Managed Care, Inc., 42 S.W.3d 62, 67 (Tenn.2001) (quoting Chenault v. Walker, 36 S.W.3d 45, 52 (Tenn.2001)).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 692 F. Supp. 2d 891 - Reagan v. City of Knoxville · Pressman v. Franklin National Bank