Simonoff v. Expedia, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
643 F.3d 1202 · 2011
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1681 · 15 U.S.C. § 1681C
Relies on United States v. Stevens · Morrison v. National Australia Bank Ltd. · Crawford v. Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson Cty. · Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp. · Basicomputer Corp. v. Scott
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] forum selection clause referring to “courts in” a state imposes a geographic limitation, not one of sovereignty. The word “in” means to “express relation of presence, existence, situation, inclusion; inclosed or surround by limits, as in a room.” Hence the phrase “courts in” a state includes any court within the physical boundaries of the state, even if the court does not derive its power and authority from the sovereignty of the state. In short, [ ] a forum selection clause that specifies “courts of’ a state limits jurisdiction to state courts, but specification of “courts in” a state includes both state and federal courts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Simóiíoff claims that the Western District of Washington is not truly “in” King County because it encompasses and has physical locations in several counties. 1 ' However, the present action was removed to the Seattle Division of the Western District of Washington, which has its only courthouse in King County. This case unquestionably was removed to a court “in” King County, Washington.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘Point of sale’ is- a term of art that applies to face-to-face transactions that take place in a ‘bricks-and-mortar’ store or some comparable physical location at which the consumer is handed a receipt. FACTA’s use of this phrase, along with the other phrases already referenced,' furnishes additional evidence that a ‘printed’ receipt is one given to the customer in a tangible form.”
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.