National Can Corporation v. K Beverage Company, Barbara Lundervold, Hayden Thompson and Joanne Thompson, Allen Lundervold and Warren Anderson’s Empirical Analysis
674 F.2d 1134 · 1982
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently July 2016 · most notably Mellon Bank (East) Psfs, National Association v. Kenneth v. Farino Leslie Trinin Robert Levitas Eileen Michaels (1992), Gundle Lining Construction Corporation v. Adams County Asphalt Inc M II (1996)
7 federal appellate · 3 district · 8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Hanson v. Denckla · McGee v. International Life Insurance · 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 55 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“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.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“(2)(a) A court may exercise personal jurisdiction over a person who acts di rectly or by an agent, as to a claim arising from the person’s: 1. Transacting any business in this Commonwealth; [[Image here]] (3)(a) When personal jurisdiction is authorized by this section, service of process may be made on such person, or any agent of such person, in any county in this Commonwealth, where he may be found, or on the secretary of state who, for this purpose, shall be deemed to be the statutory agent of such person....”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“All three criteria are met by the guarantors’ actions here. First, the defendants voluntarily signed the guaranties, without which credit would not have been furnished. The guaranty agreements showed clearly that the business the guarantors were assisting in creating was to be located in Kentucky. Those guaranty agreements, in the first .paragraph, identified the debtor as “Kentucky Beverage Co., D/B/A Pop Shoppes of America, Louisville, Kentucky”; therefore it is without question that all guarantors, including Barbara and Joanne, knew that Kentucky was the chosen site for the. soda pop venture. The guarantors were either shareholders or through marital rights had an economic interest in KBC. Signing a personal guaranty for a Kentucky business in which one has an economic interest is the sort of “conduct and connection with the form [sic] State” that makes it reasonable to “anticipate being haled into court there” when the underlying contract is breached.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.