Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 599 FSUPP 785 - Krantz v. Boneck

Krantz v. Boneck’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
February 2005
most recently cited

2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1446 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447

Relies on Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. Moitie · Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co. · Wilson v. Republic Iron & Steel Co. · Lambert Run Coal Co. v. Baltimore & Ohio Railroad · Salveson v. Western States Bankcard Ass'n

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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Where the initial pleading is indeterminate, absent fraud by the plaintiff or pleadings that provide “no clue” that the case is not “not removable,” the burden is on the defendants desiring removal to scrutinize the case and to remove it in a timely fashion. The rule is not unduly harsh on the defendants. In effect, the defendants are put on inquiry notice by the plaintiffs initial pleading and must inquire of the plaintiff the jurisdictional facts necessary to the petition to remove. It is a burden that rightly rests on the defendants because they are the ones who seek access to a court of limited jurisdiction.”
    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.