Fitzsimmons v. Barton’s Empirical Analysis
589 F.2d 330 · 1979
Citation profile
21 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 99 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably Leroy v. Great Western United Corp. (1979), Diamond Mortgage Corp. v. Sugar (1990)
21 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 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 · Gulf Oil Corporation v. Gilbert · Shaffer v. Heitner · Castor v. United States · Mississippi Pub Corporation v. Murphree
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 99 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Here the sovereign is the United States, and there can be no question but that the defendant, a resident citizen of the United States, has sufficient contacts with the United States to support the fairness of the exercise of jurisdiction over him by a United States court.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Gilbert v. Bagley · Fulk v. Bagley“[a]ny suit or action to enforce any liability or duty created by this title or rules and regulations thereunder ... may be brought in any ... district ... wherein any act or transaction constituting the violation occurred ... or in the district where the defendant is found or is an inhabitant or transacts business, and process in such eases may be served in any other district of which the defendant is an inhabitant or wherever the defendant may be found.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“threatens to set district courts adrift when they embark upon that highly fact-bound analysis of whether asserting personal jurisdiction over a particular defendant joined by nationwide service of process satisfies the nebulous standard of “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.””
3 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.