Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 590 F.2d 1124 - Lamont v. Haig

Lamont v. Haig’s Empirical Analysis

590 F.2d 1124 · 1978

Citation profile

159
cited by 159 later decisions
3
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

31 federal appellate · 72 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 159 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably Halberstam v. Welch (1983), Naartex Consulting Corp. v. Watt (1983)

31 federal appellate · 72 district · 6 state decisions

87019781980199020002010decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 22 (§ 12 of the Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 18 U.S.C. § 1385 · 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406 · 28 U.S.C. § 516

Relies on Goldlawr, Inc. v. Heiman · Ratchford v. Gay Lib · Central Illinois Public Service Co. v. United States · Abel v. United States · Cox v. Northwest Airlines, 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 159 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “be ascertained by advertence to events having operative significance in the case, and a commonsense appraisal of the implications of those events for accessibility to witnesses and records.”
    23 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) a judicial district in which any defendant resides, if all defendants are residents of the State in which the district is located; (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the -claim occurred, or a substantial part of property that is the subject of the action is situated; or (3) if there is no district in which an action may otherwise be brought as provided in this section, any judicial district in which any defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to' such action.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(b) A civil action wherein jurisdiction is not founded solely on diversity of citizenship may be brought only in the judicial district where all defendants reside, or in which the claim arose, except as otherwise provided by law.”
    5 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.