Coface v. Optique Du Monde, Ltd.’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently March 2009 · most notably Aaron Ferer Sons Limited v. Chase Manhattan Bank National Association (1984), John Boutari and Son Wines and Spirits Sa v. Attiki Importers and Distributors Incorporated (1994)
2 federal appellate · 1 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. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · M/s Bremen v. Zapata off-Shore Company · Norwood v. Kirkpatrick · Leroy v. Great Western United Corp. · National Equipment Rental, Ltd. v. Szukhent
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the convenience of the parties; (2) the convenience of material witnesses; (3) the availability of process to compel the presence of unwilling witnesses; (4) the cost of obtaining willing witnesses; (5) the relative access to sources of proof; (6) where the events at issue took place; (7) the practical problems indicating where the case can be tried more expeditiously and inexpensively; and (8) the interests of justice in general.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In any action to enforce this Note, personal jurisdiction and venue shall be at PAYEE’S option in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Onondaga, or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“28 U.S.C. § 1404 (a) provides: For the convenience of parties and witnesses, in the interest of justice, a district court may transfer any civil action to any other district or division where it might have been brought.”
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.