Marcel v. Pool Co.’s Empirical Analysis
5 F.3d 81 · 1993
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently May 2017 · most notably Wilson v. Belin (1994), Bosky v. Kroger Texas, LP (2002)
7 federal appellate · 3 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Relies on St Paul Mercury Indemnity Co v. Red Cab Co · Treadaway v. Societe Anonyme Louis-Dreyfus · Asociacion Nacional Pescadores Pequena Escala Artesanales Colombia v. Dow Quimica Colombia Sa · Michaleski v. Western Preferred Cas. Co. · Reed v. House of Decor, Inc.
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although plaintiff filed a bill of discovery more than thirty days prior to the defendants' removal, the first document stating a claim--the complaint--was filed less than thirty days prior to the defendants' filing of their joint notice of removal Second, Wilson argues that the complaint, which had no ad damnum clause, did not state claims that facially involved more than $50,000. Thus, removal was timely. Because the record contains a letter, which plaintiff's counsel sent to defendants stating that the amount in controversy exceeded $50,000, it is”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wilson v. Belin“[A]lthough the complaint in the instant case did not specify an amount of damages, it is facially apparent that damages sought by the plaintiffs here exceed $50,000. Unlike Dow Química, which involved damages for skin rashes and lost income of small-scale Colombian fishermen, the instant case involves, inter alia, a claim for wrongful death. It is facially apparent that the claims in this case—claims for wrongful death, terror in anticipation of death, loss of companionship, and funeral expenses—did exceed $50,000 at the time of removal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the complaint did not specify an amount of damages, and it was not otherwise facially apparent that the damages sought or incurred were likely above $50,-000; (2) the defendants offered only a conclusory statement in their notice of removal that was not based on direct knowledge about the plaintiffs’ claims; and, (3) the plaintiffs timely contested removal with a sworn, unrebutted affidavit indicating that the requisite amount in controversy was not present.”
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.