Hyatt Corp. v. Stanton’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently December 2010
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
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 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 1441 · 28 U.S.C. § 1602 (§ 4 of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976) · 28 U.S.C. § 1603 (§ 4 of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976) · 28 U.S.C. § 1605 (§ 4 of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976) · 28 U.S.C. § 1608 (§ 4 of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976) · 28 U.S.C. § 1651
Relies on Franchise Tax Board of the State of California v. Construction Laborers Vacation Trust for Southern California · Carnegie v. United States · Argentine Republic v. Amerada Hess Shipping Corp. · Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Independent Federation of Flight Attendants · Illinois v. City of Milwaukee
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) which is a separate legal person, corporate or otherwise, and (2) which is an organ of a foreign state or political subdivision thereof, or a majority of whose shares or other ownership interest is owned by a foreign state or political subdivision thereof, and (3) which is neither a citizen of a State of the United States as defined in section 1332(c) and (d) of this title, nor created under the laws of any third country.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“As a general matter, entities which meet the definition of an ‘agency or instrumentality of a foreign state’ could assume a variety of forms, including a state trading corporation, a mining enterprise, a transport organization such as a shipping line or airline, a steel company, a central bank, an export association, a governmental procurement agency or a department or ministry which acts and is suable in its own name.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Id. at 684 . If an entity could sue and be sued, own property, and contract in its own name, it would be considered an agency or instrumentality and not a political subdivision. Id. at 685 . NCB submits the PIF sues and is sued as, and generally holds property on behalf of, the Ministry of Finance. Al-Wohaibi Aff. ¶¶ 9,12. NCB argues the Court should employ the”
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.