Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 649 F.3d 514 - Gerber v. Riordan

Gerber v. Riordan’s Empirical Analysis

649 F.3d 514 · 2011

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
3
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 4 state decisions

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Michigan Western District Court)

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1654

Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · United States v. Olano · Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De Guinee · Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S. A. v. Brown · Goldey v. Morning News

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

  1. “[P]laintiff a reasonable expectation that [Defendants] will defend the suit on the merits or must cause the court to go to some effort that would be wasted if personal jurisdiction is later found lacking”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T]he voluntary use of certain district court procedures serve[s] as constructive consent to the personal jurisdiction of the district court ....”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “First, the defendant must purposefully avail himself of the privilege of acting in the forum state or causing consequence in the forum state. Second, the cause of action must arise from the defendant’s activities there. Finally, the acts of the defendant or consequences must have a substantial enough connection with the forum state to make the exercise of jurisdiction over the defendant reasonable.”
    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.