953 F. Supp. 2d 244 - Johnson v. Panetta’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
26 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1653 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201
Relies on Foman v. Davis · St Paul Mercury Indemnity Co v. Red Cab Co · Newman-Green, Inc. v. Alfonzo-Larrain · Firestone v. K Firestone · Dussouy v. Gulf Coast Investment 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[P]erfunctory and underdeveloped arguments, and arguments that are unsupported by pertinent authority, are deemed waived.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“1. Jason G. Vogel (hereinafter “Plaintiff’) is an individual who resides in Laguna Beach, California. The Plaintiff is a citizen of California. He is a native of Washington, DC. He has family in the DC metropolitan area. [[Image here]] 3. Defendant John Doe 1 is believed to be a citizen of Virginia, living in or near Herndon, VA, near Washington, DC. 4. Defendant John Doe 2 is believed to be a citizen of San Antonio, Texas. 5. Defendant John Doe 3 is believed to be a citizen of El Paso, Texas. 6. Defendant John Doe 4' is believed to be a citizen of Illinois, living in or near Chicago or Naperville, which is a suburb of Chicago. [[Image here]] 9. This Court also has subject matter jurisdiction because the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 exclusive of interest and costs, and the controversy is between citizens of different states, per 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (a)(1). [[Image here]] 29. A web site called NextDoor is designed to facilitate interactions and discussions of interest to members of the local community. A person who self-identified herself as Sally Forsythe joined two NextDoor communities in proximity to' the Plaintiffs property in Los Angeles. Sally Forsythe may be her real name. It is also possible that Sally Forsythe is an alias for someone else. The reason that the Plaintiff questions the real name of Sally Forsythe is because she signed up for two separate Nextdoor [sic] accounts using-two different home addresses. NextDoor has no records that they actually verified ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Generally, a court must ascertain whether it has jurisdiction before it is empowered to take any action in a matter. ... However, where, such as here, a plaintiff seeks to amend the complaint in order to correct defective allegations of jurisdiction, the plaintiff is entitled to do so pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1653 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Baltimore v. Pruitt
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.