Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 916 F.2d 1510 - Madara v. Hall

Madara v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis

916 F.2d 1510 · 1990

Citation profile

288
cited by 288 later decisions
8
states following
July 2024
most recently cited

50 federal appellate · 4 district · 62 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 288 later decisions — most recently July 2024 · most notably Ticketmaster-New York, Inc. v. Alioto (1994), Boit v. Gar-Tec Products, Inc. (1992)

50 federal appellate · 4 district · 62 state decisions

10401990200020102020decided

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 · Hanson v. Denckla · Helicopteros Nacionales De Colombia, S. A. v. Hall

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

  1. “traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.”
    44 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “A defendant who is engaged in substantial and not isolated activity within this state, whether such activity is wholly interstate, intrastate, or otherwise, is subject to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state, whether or not the claim arises from that activity.”
    17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “anticipate being haled into court there in a libel action based on the contents of its magazine.”
    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.