Coto Settlement v. Eisenberg’s Empirical Analysis
593 F.3d 1031 · 2010
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Lee v. City of Los Angeles · Knievel v. ESPN
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the complaint necessarily relies upon a document or the contents of the document are alleged in a complaint, the document's authenticity is not in question and there are no disputed issues as to the document's relevance.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“consider materials incorporated into the complaint”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the mere mention of the existence of a document is insufficient to incorporate the contents of a document”
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.