Mayes v. Leipziger’s Empirical Analysis
674 F.2d 178 · 1982
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently November 2022 · most notably Cutco Industries, Inc. v. Naughton (1986), Sher v. Johnson (1990)
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 6 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 · Hanson v. Denckla · Milliken v. Meyer · Pennoyer v. Neff · Longines-Wittnauer Watch Co. v. Barnes & Reinecke, Inc.
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) [A] court may exercise personal jurisdiction over any non-domiciliary ... who in person or through an agent, ... (3) commits a tortious act without the state ... if he ... (i) regularly does or solicits business, or engages in any other persistent code of conduct, or derives substantial revenue from goods used or consumed or services rendered, in the state, or (ii) expects or should reasonably expect the act to have consequences in the state and derives substantial revenue from interstate or international commerce ...”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“purposeful avail[ment] of the privilege of conducting activities within [New York],”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“no court has extended § 302(a)(1) to reach a nondomiciliary who never entered New York, who was solicited outside of New York to perform services outside of New York, who performed outside of New York such services as were performed____ We do not believe that ... the New York courts would exercise jurisdiction solely on the basis that defendants ... reported to their New York client ... by means of letters and calls to New York to perform their non-New York services.”
2 later decisions 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.