Huff v. Pharr’s Empirical Analysis
748 F.2d 1553 · 1984
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently July 2018
1 federal appellate · 5 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 · Shaffer v. Heitner · Watkins v. Conway
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Not at issue in Watkins , however, was whether the court in which the plaintiff sought renewal could exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant only in accordance with the same due process requirements that were operative in the original suit.... The narrow issue of this appeal is whether the defendant's participation in the original litigation and his connection with the State of California prior to that litigation satisfy the minimum contacts requirement.... We hold the defendant had the requisite minimum contacts with the State of California for the courts of that state to exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendant in the 1982 action. Such contacts were present when the original suit was filed in 1972.... The 1982 action involved a claim uniquely connected with the defendant's previous forum-related activities. Under these circumstances, we do not consider it unfair to require the defendant, when properly served, to submit again to the jurisdiction of the California courts in a suit based upon a judgment previously entered in an action involving the same claim. [ 748 F. 2d at 1554-1555 ].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The Watkins Court noted that all the plaintiff needed to do was return to the state which entered the original judgment, revive his judgment, and then domesticate the new judgment with the five-year statutory period. This is exactly what the plaintiff in [Hay] has done.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Florida's ten-year statute of limitations for domesticating a foreign judgment by renewing his California judgment:”
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.