Krone v. AMI, INC.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““In order to sustain jurisdiction under the Arkansas [Long-Arm] Statute, the plaintiff must show not only that the defendant transacted business in Arkansas but also that his cause of action is one ‘arising out of’ the transaction of business in this State by the defendant. “In other words, there must be a relationship between the defendant’s connection with Arkansas, here the transaction of business, and the injury complained of.” Krone v. A.M.I., Inc., 367 F.Supp. 1141 (E.D.Ark.1973).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 532 F. Supp. 364 - CARTER OIL COMPANY, INC. v. Apex Towing Co. · 576 F. Supp. 1156 - Davis v. Kroger Co.

2. ““C. Personal jurisdiction based upon conduct. 1. A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person, who acts directly or by an agent, as to a (cause of action) (claim for relief) arising from the person’s a. transacting any business in this state; b. contracting to supply services or things in this State; c. causing tortious injury in this State by an act or omission in this State; d. causing tortious injury in this State by an act or omission outside this State if he regularly does or solicits business, or engages in any other persistent course of conduct in this State or derives substantial revenue from goods consumed or services used in this State. 2. When jurisdiction over a person is based solely upon this section, only a (cause of action) (claim for relief) arising from acts enumerated in this section may be asserted against him.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Trace X Chemical, Inc. v. Gulf Oil Chemicals Co.

3. “In this case, the acts of the plaintiff and the defendant in making a contract for the renting of a room in Shreveport by means of the Holidex system amounted to nothing more than an antecedent fact having nothing whatever to do with the injury that plaintiff claims to have sustained. Plaintiff would have received his injury had he made his reservation by a direct telephone call from his own home in North Little Rock to the Holiday Inn in Shreveport, or indeed if he had made no reservation at all and had simply secured a room on March 17 by calling at the desk of the Holiday Inn in Shreveport.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Slocum v. Sandestin Beach Resort Hotel