DLX, Inc. v. Kentucky’s Empirical Analysis
381 F.3d 511 · 2004
Citation profile
24 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 153 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2024 · most notably Murphy v. New Milford Zoning Commission (2005), Allard v. Coenen (In Re Trans-Industries, Inc.) (2009)
24 federal appellate · 3 district · 4 state decisions
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.
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1257 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment · Edelman v. Jordan · Allen v. McCurry · District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman · Rooker v. Fidelity Trust 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 153 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A Rule 12(b)(1) motion can either attack the claim of jurisdiction on its face, in which case all allegations of the plaintiff must be considered as true, or it can attack the factual basis for jurisdiction, in which case the trial court must weigh the evidence and the plaintiff bears the burden of proving that jurisdiction exists.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“would have had to hear that federal claim”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“The federal claim is inextricably intertwined with the state-court judgment if the federal claim succeeds only to the extent that the state court wrongly decided the issues before it. Where federal relief can only be predicated upon a conviction that the state court was wrong, it is difficult to conceive the federal proceeding as, in substance, anything other than a prohibited appeal of the state-court judgment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.