Emerald Asset Advisors, LLC v. Schaffer’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 1404 · 28 U.S.C. § 1406
Relies on International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Burger King Corporation v. Rudzewicz · World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson · Goldlawr, Inc. v. Heiman · Kreutter v. McFadden Oil Corp.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“UMP France is the publisher of the infringing song. In the United States, Universal MGB undertakes these activities as UMP France’s exclusive U.S, subpublisher. A subpublisher licensee administers rights granted to it by its licensor. Therefore, it acts ‘for the benefit of and with the knowledge and consent of UMP France, who in- turn can only act' ‘for the benefit of and with the knowledge and consent’ of its writer li-censor Hoffman. Á licensee’s further licensing and collection of royalties are for the benefit of its exclusive licensor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Wallert v. Atlan
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.