806 F. Supp. 2d 452 - Katz v. Pershing, LLC’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 9 district ·

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

1. “When faced with motions to dismiss under both 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), a district court, absent good reason to do otherwise, should ordinarily decide the 12(b)(1) motion first.... It is not simply formalistic to decide the jurisdictional issue when the case would be dismissed in any event for failure to state a claim. Different consequences flow from dismissals under 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6): for example, dismissal under the former, not being on the merits, is without res judicata effect.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 880 F. Supp. 2d 220 - In re JPMorgan Chase Mortgage Modification Litigation · 894 F. Supp. 2d 144 - Plumbers' Union Local No. 12 Pension Fund v. Nomura Asset Acceptance Corp.

2. “three fundamental requisites of standing that every litigant invoking the jurisdiction of the federal courts must possess: (1) injury-in-fact — an invasion of a legally-protected interest that is both concrete and particularized, and actual or imminent; (2) causation; and (3) redressability.... Several prudential considerations also infuse standing determinations. These considerations, which militate against standing, principally concern whether the litigant (1) asserts the rights and interests of a third party and not his or her own, (2) presents a claim arguably falling outside the zone of interests protected by the specific law invoked, or (3) advances abstract questions of wide public significance essentially amounting to generalized grievances more appropriately addressed to the representative branches.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 842 F. Supp. 2d 407 - Oum v. Wells Fargo, N.A.

3. “Generally speaking, motions to dismiss on the grounds of a failure to allege an injury in fact implicate constitutional standing principles and thus are predicated on Rule 12(b)(1) rather than Rule 12(b)(6)”) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). , To the extent defendants take issue with plaintiff’s showing that he suffered a particularized harm, their argument is unavailing. Hochendoner v. Genzyme Corp., 823 F.3d 724, 731 (1st Cir. 2016) (”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Zauderer v. Cirrus Consulting Group (USA), Inc.