Chaara v. Intel Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1446 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447
Relies on Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets · Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians v. Holyfield · Caterpillar Inc. v. Lewis · Freeport-McMoRan Inc. v. K N Energy, Inc. · Marshall Huffman v. Saul Holdings Limited Partnership
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[Consolidation does not cause one civil action to emerge from two; the actions do not lose their separate identity; the parties to one action do not become parties to the other.” ... Instead, consolidation is an artificial link forged by a court for the administrative convenience of the parties; it fails to erase the fact that, underneath consolidation’s facade, lie two individual cases.”
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.