Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 945 F.2d 198 - Reed v. International Union of United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers, Local Union No. 663

Reed v. International Union of United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers, Local Union No. 663’s Empirical Analysis

945 F.2d 198 · 1991

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
3
states following
September 2014
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently September 2014 · most notably Boit v. Gar-Tec Products, Inc. (1992), In re Paoli Railroad Yard PCB Litigation (2000)

17 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

180199120002010decided

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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · International Shoe Co. v. Washington · Vaca v. Sipes · United Parcel Service, Inc. v. Mitchell · O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden

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

  1. “Any person or organization that is a nonresident of this state ... submits to the jurisdiction of the courts of this state as to any action arising from the following acts committed by him or his agent: (1) doing any business in this state, (3) causing personal injury or property damage in this state by an occurrence, act or omission done outside this state if he regularly does or solicits business or engages in any other persistent course of conduct, or derives substantial revenue or benefit from goods, materials, or services used, consumed, or rendered in this state.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[T|he requirements under both section 301(c) and the due process”
    1 later decision 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.