Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 888 FSUPP 56 - Grimm v. Plasma Processing Corp.

Grimm v. Plasma Processing Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
December 2007
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)

Relies on Caperton v. Beatrice Pocahontas Coal Co. · Mullins v. Beatrice Pocahontas Co. · AFA Enterprises, Inc. v. American States Insurance · Pryor v. Calmar Steamship Corp · Caperton v. Pocahontas

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

  1. “corporate activities test focuses on the location of the corporation's tangible assets”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. Peterson

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.