Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 836 F.2d 341 - Saylor v. Dyniewski

Saylor v. Dyniewski’s Empirical Analysis

836 F.2d 341 · 1988

Citation profile

82
cited by 82 later decisions
3
states following
October 2020
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably 14 Cal. 4th 434 - Vons Companies, Inc. v. Seabest Foods, Inc. (1996), Diamond Mortgage Corp. v. Sugar (1990)

12 federal appellate · 2 district · 4 state decisions

53019881990200020102020decided

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. § 1406

Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. Hall · Piper Aircraft Co. v. Reyno · Milliken v. Meyer

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

  1. “(a) Any person, whether or not a citizen or resident of this state ... does any of the acts hereinafter enumerated, thereby submits ... to the jurisdiction of the courts of this State as to any cause of action arising from the doing of any of such acts: (1) The transaction of any business within the State; (7) The maMng or performance of any contract or promise substantially connected with this State. (c) A court may also exercise jurisdiction on any other basis now or hereafter permitted by the Illinois Constitution and the Constitution of the United States.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(a) Any person, whether or not a citizen or resident of this State, who in person or through an agent does any of the acts hereinafter enumerated, thereby "submits such person ... to the jurisdiction of the courts of this State as to any cause of action arising from the doing of any such acts: (1) The transaction of any business within this State; (7) The making or performance of any contract or promise substantially connected with this State; (f) Only causes of action arising from acts enumerated herein may be asserted against a defendant in an action in which jurisdiction over him or her is based upon subsection (a).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “must accept all undenied factual allegations and resolve all factual disputes in favor of the party seeking to establish 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.