Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 669 F.3d 693 - Schneider v. Hardesty

Schneider v. Hardesty’s Empirical Analysis

669 F.3d 693 · 2012

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
3
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Hanson v. Denckla · Milliken v. Meyer

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

  1. “First, the defendant must purposefully avail himself of the privilege of acting in the forum state or causing a 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 caused by the defendant must have a substantial enough connection with the forum state to make the exercise of jurisdiction over the defendant reasonable.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[D]ue process is satisfied if the defendant has 'minimum contacts' with the forum state such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend ' "traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(A) A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person who acts directly or by an agent, as to a cause of action arising from the person’s: (1) Transacting any business in this state; ... (3) Causing tortious injury by an act or omission in this state; ... (6) Causing tortious injury in this state to any person by an act outside this state committed with the purpose of injuring persons, when he might reasonably have expected that some person would be injured thereby in this state [.]”
    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.