Stoddard v. Carlin’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act) · 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 42 U.S.C. § 12131 (§ 201 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Haines v. Kerner · Malley v. Briggs · Pierson v. Ray
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“substantial revenue from goods used or consumed, or services rendered, in the District of Columbia.”
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.