Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 71 FRD 101 - Hercules Inc. v. Dynamic Export Corp.

Hercules Inc. v. Dynamic Export Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1976

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably Corporacion Venezolana Fomento v. Vintero Sales Corporation a J E (1980), International Shipping Co., S.A. v. Hydra Offshore, Inc. (1989)

3 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions

18019761980199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)

Relies on Zahn v. International Paper Co. · Moore v. New York Cotton Exchange · First National City Bank v. Banco Nacional de Cuba · Baker v. Gold Seal Liquors, Inc. · Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody

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

  1. “It is a fair inference that a corporation which has located its principal place of business in a State has adopted that State as its actual residence and will not be subject to prejudice against outsiders. If a British corporation has located its prin cipal place of business outside of the United States, however, and has set up two branches in the United States, one in Chicago and one in New York, and the one in New York is merely its principal place of business in the United States, no inference can be legitimately drawn from those facts that it has adopted New York as its actual residence. Its contact with New York may be so slight that it is still an outsider there. On the other hand, if a Bahaman corporation, for example, has located its principal place of business in New York, the inference is legitimate that it has adopted New York as its actual residence and that it is no longer entitled to be considered an outsider and to deserve the protection accorded outsiders.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Numerous courts have found counterclaims arising out of the same contract as the plaintiffs' claim to be compulsory.”
    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.