Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 895 FSUPP 972 - Blakemore v. Pekay

Blakemore v. Pekay’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
5
states following
September 2017
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently September 2017

5 federal appellate · 4 district · 6 state decisions

90199520002010decided

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 15 U.S.C. § 1692G (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692I (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692K (Sherman Antitrust Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 1692L (Fair Debt Collection Practices Act) · 15 U.S.C. § 45 (§ 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914)

Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Conley v. Gibson · Blum v. Stenson

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

  1. “The venue provision of the FDCPA was designed to limit the ability of debt collectors to file debt collection actions in courts inconvenient to the debtor.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “in the judicial district or similar legal entity ... in which such consumer signed the contract sued upon[.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The weight of the case law thus appears to favor the interpretation of the phrase "judicial district or similar legal entity" as meaning state county. This court concludes that in light of the legislative history, the informal FTC letter, and previous case law, the FDCPA venue provision prohibits debt collectors from filing legal actions on debts in counties other than where the debtor resides or where the contract that is being sued upon was signed.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.