American Land Program, Inc. v. Bonaventura Uitgevers Maatschappij, N.V.’s Empirical Analysis
710 F.2d 1449 · 1983
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 11 district · 7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Behagen v. Amateur Basketball Ass'n (1984), Rambo v. American Southern Insurance (1988)
7 federal appellate · 11 district · 7 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Hanson v. Denckla · Milliken v. Meyer · Kulko v. Superior Court of California in and for City and County of San Francisco
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"some courts have recognized a 'conspiracy theory of personal jurisdiction, whereby jurisdiction can be obtained over out-of-state defendants who have conspired with in-state defendants.... But, to sustain jurisdiction over an out-of-state co-conspirator these courts required something more than the presence of a co-conspirator within the forum state, such as substantial acts performed there in furtherance of the con spiracy and of which the out-of-state co-conspirator was or should have been aware."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In enacting the long-arm statute, the Colorado legislature intended to extend the jurisdiction of Colorado courts to the fullest extent permitted by the due process clause of the United States Constitution.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“... In the case before us, ALP Inc. has alleged by unverified complaint that a conspiracy existed.... Here, however, defendants have countered by sworn affidavits that no conspiracy to defame existed. ALP Inc. has failed to controvert defendants’ affidavits other than by conclusory allegations in its complaint and briefs. ALP Inc. has not, for example, asserted by affidavit that defendants conspired to commit any overt act in Utah (or any other state) in furtherance of the conspiracy.... “Mere allegation of conspiracy, without some sort of pri-ma facie evidence factual showing of a conspiracy, cannot be the basis of personal jurisdiction of co-conspirators outside the territorial limits of the court.” Baldridge v. McPike, Inc., 466 F.2d 65, 68 (10th Cir.1972). We therefore conclude that ALP has not met is threshold burden of establishing personal jurisdiction over Leeman and Van Rossum.”
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.