CompuServe, Inc. v. Patterson’s Empirical Analysis
89 F.3d 1257 · 1996
Citation profile
42 federal appellate · 32 district · 48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 348 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Zippo Manufacturing Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc. (1997), Panavision International, L.P. v. Toeppen (1998)
42 federal appellate · 32 district · 48 state decisions — followed in 17 states
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 International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · McGee v. International Life Insurance · Asahi Metal Industry Co. v. Superior Court of Cal., Solano Cty.
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 348 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“First, the defendant must purposefully avail himself of the privilege of acting in the forum state or causing a consequence in the forum state. Second, the cause of action must arise from the defendant’s activities there. Finally, the acts of the defendant or consequences caused by the defendant must have a substantial enough connection with the forum to make the exercise of jurisdiction over the defendant reasonable.”
49 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'If a defendant's contacts with the forum state are related to the operative facts of the controversy, then an action will be deemed to have arisen from those contacts.'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“A court must consider several factors in this context, including the burden on the defendant, the interest of the forum state, the plaintiff's interest in obtaining relief, and the interest of other states in securing the most efficient resolution of controversies.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.