Karl Koch Erecting Co. v. New York Convention Center Development Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
838 F.2d 656 · 1988
Citation profile
51 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably Manetti-Farrow, Inc. v. Gucci America, Inc. (1988), Phillips v. Audio Active Ltd. (2007)
51 federal appellate · 5 district · 2 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447
Relies on Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Mitsubishi Motors Corporation v. Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc Soler Chrysler-Plymouth Inc · M/s Bremen v. Zapata off-Shore Company · Thermtron Products, Inc. v. Hermansdorfer · Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Wesolowski
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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[n]o action or proceeding shall be commenced ... except in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the parties' inclusion of the forum-selection clause makes little sense unless it precludes removal by Koch”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Given the significance attached to forum selection clauses, the courts have placed a substantial burden on a plaintiff seeking to defeat such a clause, requiring it to demonstrate enforcement of the clause would be unreasonable under the circumstances of the case. That is, that the forum selected would be unavailable or unable to accomplish substantial justice. Moreover, in determining reasonability, the choice of forum requirement must have some rational basis in light of the facts underlying the transaction. However, neither the inconvenience nor additional expense in litigating the selected forum is part of the test of unreason-ability. Finally, a forum selection clause will not be enforced if to do so will bring about a result contrary to the public policy of the forum.”
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.