570 F. Supp. 708 - D'Antuono v. CCH Computax Systems, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 19 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably Lambert v. Kysar (1993), Blanco v. Banco Industrial De Venezuela (1993)
6 federal appellate · 19 district · 3 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406 · 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Relies on M/s Bremen v. Zapata off-Shore Company · Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co. · Scherk v. Alberto-Culver Co. · Insurance Company v. Morse · Plum Tree, Inc. v. Stockment
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The identity of the law that governs the construction of the contract. (2) The place of execution of the contract. (3) The place where the transactions are to be performed. (4) The availability of remedies in the designated forum. (5) The public policy of the initial forum state. (6) Location of the parties, the convenience of prospective witnesses, and the accessibility of evidence. (7) The relative bargaining power of the parties and the circumstances surrounding their dealings. (8) The presence or absence of fraud, undue influence (or other extenuating) circumstances. (9) The conduct of the parties.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The district court of a district in which is filed a case laying venue in the wrong division or district shall dismiss, or if it be in the interest of justice, transfer such case to any district or division in which it could have been brought.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[the Zapata fraud exception] does not mean that any time a dispute arising out of a transaction is based upon an allegation of fraud ... the clause is unenforceable. Rather, it means that [a] ... forum-selection clause in a contract is not enforceable if the inclusion of that clause in the contract was the product of fraud or coercion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Lambert v. Kysar
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.