Jones v. Secord’s Empirical Analysis
684 F.3d 1 · 2012
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Mack v. Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. · Corso v. Merrill · Jupin v. Kask
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“plaintiff, who made a deliberate choice to sue in federal court rather than in . . . state court, is not in a position to ask us to blaze a new trail that the [state] courts have not invited.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(i) explains his or her current inability to adduce the facts essential to filing an opposition, (ii) provides a plausible basis for believing that the sought-after facts,can be assembled within a reasonable time, and (iii) indicates how those facts would influence the outcome of the pending summary judgment motion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is not the court’s responsibility to dig through the record in a particular case unsolicited and determine whether some timing problem might exist in. connection with a summary judgment motion.”
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.