Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 657 F.3d 838 - Fiore v. Walden

Fiore v. Walden’s Empirical Analysis

657 F.3d 838 · 2011

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
April 2012
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Appellate journey

Relationships

Applies 21 U.S.C. § 881 (§ 511 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1356 · 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 28 U.S.C. § 1391

Relies on Ashcroft v. Iqbal · International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson

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

  1. “[u]pon returning to their homes in Las Vegas, plaintiffs marshaled records within Las Vegas to comply with defendant’s request and representation ... On August 30, 2006, plaintiffs forwarded the following to Walden from Las Vegas: i. Copies of federal tax returns showing that each plaintiff made their living through gaming; ii. Receipts for their trip; iii. Travel itinerary for the trip; and iv. Hotel records showing that they gambled at such a high level that the casinos would provide them rooms on a complimentary (free) basis.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) a judicial district where any defendant resides, if all defendants reside in the same State, (2) a judicial district in which a substantial part of the events or omissions giving rise to the claim occurred, ... or (3) a judicial district in which any defendant may be found, if there is no district in which the action may otherwise be brought.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “threatens a substantial expansion of the scope of personal jurisdiction” and departs from still other Supreme Court decisions affirming that personal jurisdiction”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.