Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 994 F.2d 1039 - Packard

Packard’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

187
cited by 187 later decisions
2
states following
December 2021
most recently cited

17 federal appellate · 45 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 187 later decisions — most recently December 2021 · most notably Cohen v. Office Depot, Inc. (2000), In re Brand Name Prescription Drugs Antitrust Litigation (1997)

17 federal appellate · 45 district · 2 state decisions

7701990200020102020decided

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 Erie Co v. Tompkins · McNutt v. General Motors Acceptance Corp. · Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission · St Paul Mercury Indemnity Co v. Red Cab Co · Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. Estate J Bosch Second National Bank of New Haven

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

  1. “In carrying out that task, we must consider relevant state precedents, analogous decisions, considered dicta, scholarly works, and any other reliable data tending convincingly to show how the highest court in the state would decide the issue at hand.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[I]f, from the face of the pleadings, it is apparent, to a legal certainty, that the plaintiff cannot recover the amount claimed, or if, from the proofs, the court is satisfied to a like certainty that the plaintiff never was entitled to recover that amount, and that his claim was therefore colorable for the purpose of conferring jurisdiction, the suit will be dismissed.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[i]n a diversity-based class action seeking primarily money damages, allowing the amount in controversy to be measured by the defendant's cost [of complying with an injunction] would eviscerate Snyder's holding that the claims of class members may not be aggregated in order to meet the jurisdictional threshold.”
    5 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.