Toomey v. Dahl’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
7 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1390 · 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406 · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1963
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Gulf Oil Corporation v. Gilbert · Shaffer v. Heitner
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“may plead their unjust-enrichment claim in the alternative ... without fear of dismissal”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) formation of a contract, (2) performance by plaintiff of any conditions precedent to the right to demand performance by the defendant, and (3) breach of the contract by defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Holman v. CPT Corp. , 457 N.W.2d 740 , 745 (Minn. Ct. App. 1990) (citation omitted). Like promissory estoppel, unjust enrichment is an equitable claim that”
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.