Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 404 F.2d 50 - Powers v. Fultz

Powers v. Fultz’s Empirical Analysis

404 F.2d 50 · 1968

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
August 2019
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 2019

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

30196819701980199020002010decided

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. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)

Relies on St Paul Mercury Indemnity Co v. Red Cab Co · Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. American Mutual Liability Insurance · Breault v. Feigenholtz

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

  1. ““We are of the view that plaintiff’s allegation with respect to the existence of the requisite jurisdictional amount and the prayer for judgment combine to constitute at most a defective allegation of the existence of diversity jurisdiction. The limitation qf the principal sum of the judgment sought to $10,000 is entirely consistent with the allegations of the complaint with respect to the amount of the gift ($10,000) intended to be made. If plaintiff had intended to assert a claim for $10,081.25 based on the defendant-appellee’s withdrawal of that amount from the account (the $81.25 apparently represents interest .) the plaintiff should have amended his complaint to assert such a claim .... And the complaint sought recovery of but $10,000 with interest thereon from a specific date. No claim in excess of $10,000, exclusive of interest and costs, was asserted.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““(a) The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $10,000, exclusive of interest and costs, and is between — • (1) citizens of different States . . . . ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.