Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 712 FSUPP 117 - Coleman v. Chen

Coleman v. Chen’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently June 2014

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

401988199020002010decided

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. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406

Relies on World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Hanson v. Denckla · Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. Hall · Perkins v. Benguet Consolidated Mining Co. · Martin v. Stokes

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

  1. “It cannot be said that the purported injuries arose from any solicitation by Defendant. Rather, the purported injuries may have arisen from the condition of Defendant Alpine Slide in the state of Kentucky. The connection between the Defendant’s mere solicitation and the Plaintiffs alleged injuries are too tenuous to assert this Court’s jurisdiction. This Court concludes that Plaintiff has failed to meet the requirements of Ohio’s long arm statute, O.R.C. § 2307.382.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[I]t cannot be said that Plaintiffs personal injury action arose from any solicitation by Defendants Chen. The circumstances which may have caused her injury are unrelated to the solicitation. Plaintiffs injury did not arise from Defendant Chens’ advertising, but (allegedly) from the condition of the Pasadena Holiday Inn’s parking lot.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “made for the purpose of avoiding an obstacle to adjudication on the merits in the district court where the action was originally brought. That defect may be either improper venue or lack of personal jurisdiction.”
    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.