Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 423 A.2d 174 - Armstrong v. Pomerance

Armstrong v. Pomerance’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
3
states following
September 2023
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 4 district · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably 620 So. 2d 1004 - Doe v. Thompson (1993), Sternberg v. O'NEIL (1988)

2 federal appellate · 4 district · 28 state decisions

11019801990200020102020decided

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

Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Hanson v. Denckla · Cort v. Ash · McGee v. International Life Insurance · Shaffer v. Heitner

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

  1. “(a) Every nonresident of this State who after September 1, 1977, accepts election or appointment as a director, trustee or member of the governing body of a corporation organized under the laws of this State or who after June 30, 1978 serves in such capacity ... shall, by such acceptance or by such service, be deemed thereby to have consented to the appointment of the registered agent of such corporation ... as his agent upon whom service of process may be made in all civil actions or proceedings brought in this State, by or on behalf of, or against such corporation, in which such director, trustee or member is a necessary or proper party, or in any action or proceeding against such director, trustee or member for violation of his duty in such capacity, whether or not he continues to serve as such director, trustee or member at the time suit is commenced.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. ““ * * * authorizes jurisdiction only in actions which are inextricably bound up in Delaware law and where Delaware has a strong interest in providing a forum for redress of injuries inflicted upon or by a Delaware domiciliary, i. e., the Delaware corporation.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “Delaware has a substantial interest in defining, regulating and enforcing the fiduciary obligations which directors of Delaware corporations owe to such corporations and the shareholders who elect them. In promoting that interest it is essential that Delaware afford a convenient and available forum for supervising the affairs of Delaware corporations and the conduct of directors of Delaware corporations. The legislation is designed to accomplish that objective....”
    2 later decisions 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.