Knop v. Mackall’s Empirical Analysis
645 F.3d 381 · 2011
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447
Relies on Koster v. Lumbermens Mut Casualty Co · Martin v. Franklin Capital Corp. · Navarro Savings Assn. v. Lee · Smith v. Sperling · Salem Trust Co. v. Manufacturers' Finance Co.
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A basis for removal is objectively reasonable when it 'has at least some logical and precedential force.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“only if 'the removing party lacked an objectively reasonable basis for seeking removal.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“just costs and any actual expenses, including attorney fees, incurred as a result of the removal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Colon v. Ashby
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.