Harris v. Bankers Life & Casualty Co.’s Empirical Analysis
425 F.3d 689 · 2005
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 9 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably Abrego Abrego v. The Dow Chemical Co (2006), Carvalho v. Equifax Information Services, LLC (2010)
15 federal appellate · 9 district ·
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 Shamrock Oil & Gas Corp. v. Sheets · Smith v. Sperling · Leffall v. Dallas Independent School District · Whitaker v. American Telecasting, Inc. · Owens v. Davis
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a copy of an amended pleading, motion, order or other paper”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“starts to run from defendant's receipt of the initial pleading only when that pleading affirmatively reveals on its face the facts necessary for federal court jurisdiction.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'a non-diverse defendant is deemed a sham defendant if, after all disputed questions of fact and all ambiguities in the controlling state law are resolved in the plaintiff's favor, the plaintiff could not possibly recover against the party whose joinder is questioned.' " Id. Although a defendant must show that there is virtually no chance that the plaintiff can state a viable claim in order to invoke fraudulent removal, that assessment must still be based largely on the allegations of the plaintiff's complaint. Removability is therefore generally determined by the "four corners of the applicable pleadings, not through the subjective knowledge or a duty to make further inquiry.”
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.