810 So. 2d 641 - Sieber v. Campbell’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Mutual Service Insurance v. Frit Industries, Inc. (2004), Sloss Industries Corp. v. Eurisol (2007)
2 federal appellate · 53 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 World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Calder v. Jones · Duke v. Young · 431 So. 2d 141 - Alabama Waterproofing Co., Inc. v. Hanby · 501 So. 2d 459 - Dillon Equities v. Palmer & Cay, Inc.
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"(I) otherwise having some minimum contacts with this state and, under the circumstances, it is fair and reasonable to require the person to come to this state to defend an action. The minimum contacts referred to in this subdivision (I) shall be deemed sufficient, notwithstanding a failure to satisfy the requirement of subdivisions (A)-(H) of this subsection (2), so long as the prosecution of the action against a person in this state is not inconsistent with the constitution of this state or the Constitution of the United States."”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage“A physical presence in Alabama is not a prerequisite to personal jurisdiction over a nonresident.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage“should reasonably anticipate being haled into court [here].”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.