Water Splash, Inc. v. Menon’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2024 · most notably Monasky v. Taglieri (2020), Midvale City Corp. v. Haltom (2003)
6 federal appellate · 2 district · 10 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 133 S. Ct. 2517 - University of Tex. Southwestern Medical Center v. Nassar · Air France v. Saks · Volkswagenwerk Aktiengesellschaft v. Schlunk · Medellin v. Texas · Abbott v. Abbott
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“this does not mean that the [Hague Service] Convention affirmatively authorizes service by mail. Article 10(a) simply provides that, as long as the receiving state does not object, the Convention does not 'interfere with ... the freedom' to serve documents through postal channels. In other words, in cases governed by the Hague Service Convention, service by mail is permissible if two conditions are met: first, the receiving state has not objected to service by mail; and second, service by mail is authorized under otherwise-applicable law. (See Brockmeyer , [ supra ,] 383 F.3d at [pp.] 803-804.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Provided the State of destination does not object, the present Convention shall not interfere with -- [¶] ... [¶] b) the freedom of judicial officers, officials or other competent persons of the State of origin to effect service of judicial documents directly through the judicial officers, officials or other competent persons of the State of destination, [or] [¶] c) the freedom of any person interested in a judicial proceeding to effect service of judicial documents directly through the judicial officers, officials or other competent persons of the State of destination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“may look beyond the written words to the history of the treaty, the negotiations, and the practical construction adopted by the parties”
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.