Coury v. Prot’s Empirical Analysis
85 F.3d 244 · 1996
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 129 later decisions — most recently September 2023 · most notably Revell v. Lidov (2002), Mullins v. Testamerica, Inc. (2009)
36 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 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. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1447
Relies on Insurance Corp. of Ireland v. Compagnie Des Bauxites De Guinee · Owen Equipment & Erection Co. v. Kroger · American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Finn · Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain · City of Indianapolis v. Chase Nat Bank of City of New York
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 129 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]hile some opinions seem to imply that the burden of persuasion rests with the party attempting to show a change of domicile, this is an overstatement. The proper rule is that the party attempting to show a change assumes the burden of going forward on that issue. The ultimate burden on the issue of jurisdiction rests with the plaintiff or the party invoking federal jurisdiction.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The burden of showing that the findings of the district court are clearly erroneous is heavier if the credibility of witnesses is a factor in the trial court's decision.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he major purpose of alienage jurisdiction is to promote international relations by assuring other countries that litigation involving their nationals will be treated at the national level, and' alien-age jurisdiction is also intended to allow foreign subjects to avoid real or perceived bias in the state courts — a justification that should not be available to the dual citizen who is an American.”
2 later decisions 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.