Margoles v. Johns’s Empirical Analysis
483 F.2d 1212 · 1973
Citation profile
41 federal appellate · 49 district · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 135 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Ticketmaster-New York, Inc. v. Alioto (1994), Reuber v. United States (1984)
41 federal appellate · 49 district · 20 state decisions
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 · McGee v. International Life Insurance · Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co. · 22 Ill. 2d 432 - Gray v. American Radiator & Standard Sanitary Corp.
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 135 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[u]nless we wish to delve into a magical mystery tour of 'projecting presences,' we must find that no jurisdiction can be afforded by virtue of section (a)(3).”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A new chapter (4) is added, incorporating a modified version of the first two articles of the Uniform Interstate and International Procedure Act. The uniform provisions codify recent case law with respect to extraterritorial jurisdiction over and service upon persons in civil litigation, and supply the reorganized trial bench of general jurisdiction with a necessary procedural adjunct. Chapter 4 more specifically grants expanded bases of jurisdiction and modes of service identical to or reciprocal with those provided under the laws of the nearby State of Maryland for the courts of that State, and substantially the same as those provided in the adjacent State of Virginia and approximately 10 other States.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) A District of Columbia court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person, who acts directly or by an agent, as to a claim for relief arising from the person’s— (1) transacting any business in the District of Columbia. H: Hs sis * *”
5 later decisions 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.