Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 381 F.3d 701 - Thomas v. Guardsmark, Inc.

Thomas v. Guardsmark, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

381 F.3d 701 · 2004

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
2
states following
May 2024
most recently cited

14 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably Geinosky v. City of Chicago (2012), Pisciotta v. Old National Bancorp (2007)

14 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

190200420102020decided

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. § 1441

Relies on Klaxon Co. v. Stentor Electric Manufacturing Co. · Guaranty Trust Co. v. York · Mastrobuono v. Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc. · Guaranty Trust Co. v. York · Pennsylvania State Police v. Suders

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

  1. “Illinois respects a contract's choice-of-law clause so long as the contract is valid and the law chosen is not contrary to Illinois's fundamental public policy”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]n a diversity case, the federal court must apply the choice of law rules of the forum state to determine applicable substantive law,”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a limitations period begins to run when facts exist that authorize one party to maintain an action against another.”
    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.