green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
7.7 score
“as for the exchange of communications between texas and alaska in the development of the contract, that in itself is also insufficient to be characterized as purposeful activity invoking the benefits and protections of the forum state's laws”
Treatment trajectory · 1985 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1985
2005
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 21 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Rioux
he smaller the group is, the more the comparative disparity figure distorts the proportional representation.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Lak, Inc. v. Deer Creek Enterprises
as for the exchange of communications between texas and alaska in the development of the contract, that in itself is also insufficient to be characterized as purposeful activity invoking the benefits and protections of the forum state's laws
discussed
Cited "see"
Magnolia Gas Co. v. Knight Equipment & Manufacturing Corp.
(2×)
See Hydrokinetics, Inc. v. Alaska Mechanical, Inc., 700 F.2d 1026, 1029 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2180 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Lauree Anne Brekke, United States of America v. James Stanley Brekke
See United States v. Poston, 727 F.2d 734, 738 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
Leonard v. USA Petroleum Corp.
See Hydrokinetics, Inc. v. Alaska Mechanical, Inc., 700 F.2d 1026 (5th Cir. 1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2180 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Thomas C. Ramseur v. Howard C. Beyer, Superintendent, New Jersey State Prison, Robert Del Tufo, New Jersey Attorney General
(2×)
See Castaneda, 430 U.S. at 496 n. 17, 97 S.Ct. at 1281 n. 17 18 See United States v. Hafen, 726 F.2d 21, 23 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984) (2.02%); Bryant v. Wainwright, 686 F.2d 1373, 1377-78 (11th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 461 U.S. 932 , 103 S.Ct. 2096 , 77 L.Ed.2d 305 (1983) (7.4%); United States v. Hawkins, 661 F.2d 436, 442 (5th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 456 U.S. 991 , 102 S.Ct. 2274 , 73 L.Ed.2d 1287 (1982) (5.45%); United States v. Clifford, 640 F.2d 150, 155 (8th Cir.1981) (7.2%); United States ex rel.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Ronald Schmitz
See United States v. Poston, 727 F.2d 734, 738 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Johnson v. State
(2×)
See and cf. United States v. Hafen, 726 F.2d 21, 25 (1st Cir.1984), cert. den. 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984); Fillippini v. Ristaino, 585 F.2d 1163, 1196 (1st Cir.1978); Maynard v. Meachum, 545 F.2d 273 (1st Cir.1976).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wilfried Van Cauwenberghe
See United States v. Poston, 727 F.2d 734, 740 (8th Cir.) (“[Cjriminal activity is an integral part of the offense charged if it is ‘so blended or connected with the one on trial as that proof of one incidentally involves the other or explains the circumstances thereof----’”) (quoting United States v. Miller, 508 F.2d 444, 448-49 (7th Cir.1974)), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Patricia Eileen Krapp
See United States v. Poston, 727 F.2d 734, 740 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wilfried Van Cauwenberghe
See United States v. Poston, 727 F.2d 734, 740 (8th Cir.) (“[C]riminal activity is an integral part of the offense charged if it is ‘so blended or connected with the one on trial as that proof of one incidentally involves the other or explains the circumstances thereof----’”) (quoting United States v. Miller, 508 F.2d 444, 448-49 (7th Cir.1974)), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
Peter R. Fitzpatrick v. Louie L. Wainwright
(2×)
See United States v. Hafen, 726 F.2d 21, 26 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984); United States v. Kimmel, 672 F.2d 720, 721-22 (9th Cir. 1982).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Edward K. Savides
See United States v. Hafen, 726 F.2d 21, 23 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see"
David H. Stuart and Richard A. Whitaker v. Richard G. Spademan
See Hydrokinetics, Inc. v. Alaska Mechanical, Inc., 700 F.2d 1026, 1028 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 104 S.Ct. 2180 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984); Brilmayer, How Contacts Count: Due Process Limitations on State Court Jurisdiction, 1980 Sup.Ct.Rev. 77.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Omotosho v. Giant Eagle, Inc.
United States v. Royal, 174 F.3d 1 , 7 n. 4 (1st Cir.1999); see also United States v. Hafen, 726 F.2d 21, 24 (1st Cir.) (“the smaller the group is, the more the comparative disparity figure distorts the proportional representation”), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984); but see United States v. Rogers, 73 F.3d 774, 777 (8th Cir.) (“the comparative disparity calculation provides a more meaningful measure of systematic impact vis-a-vis the ‘distinctive’ group”), cert. denied, 517 U.S. 1239 , 116 S.Ct. 1889 , 135 L.Ed.2d 183 (1996). “[T]he debate abou…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Joseph M. Coleman & Associates, Ltd. v. Colonial Metals
See, e.g., Hydrokinetics, Inc. v. Alaska Mechanical, Inc., 700 F.2d 1026 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2180 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984); Jadair, Inc. v. Walt Keeler Co., Inc., 679 F.2d 131 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 944 , 103 S.Ct. 258 , 74 L.Ed.2d 201 (1982).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Cornell
(2×)
Compare Pate, 383 U.S. at 384 , 86 S.Ct. at 841 (court erred by not ordering a hearing to determine competence to stand trial where counsel insisted defendant's present sanity was in issue), and Evans, 534 F. Supp. at 794-98 (error not to order competency hearing on waiver of counsel where counsel and advisory counsel raised issue of competency before, during, and after trial), with United States v. Hafen, 726 F.2d 21, 25 (1st Cir.1984), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984) (upholding waiver of counsel without competency hearing in part because defendant's counse…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Oses v. Com. of Mass.
McCann, 317 U.S. 269, 279 , 63 S.Ct. 236, 242 , 87 L.Ed. 268 (1942)); see also United States v. Hafen, 726 F.2d 21, 25-26 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2179 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984); Maynard v. Meachum, 545 F.2d 273, 277-79 (1st Cir. 1976).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Cauff Lippman & Co. v. Apogee Finance Group, Inc.
Stuart v. Spademan, 772 F.2d 1185, 1193 (5th Cir.1985); see also Hydrokinetics, Inc. v. Alaska Mechanical, Inc., 700 F.2d 1026, 1028 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2180 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sea Lift, Inc. v. Refinadora Costarricense De Petroleo, S.A., a Foreign Corporation, Referred to as Recope
A meeting in the forum state may constitute “purposeful availment” if it involves “significant negotiations of important terms.” Neiman v. Rudolf Wolff & Co., 619 F.2d 1189 , 1194 & n. 5 (7th Cir. 1980); see also Hydrokinetics, Inc. v. Alaska Mechanical, Inc., 700 F.2d 1026, 1029 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2180 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bellante, Clauss, Miller & Partners v. Alireza
See also Hydrokinetics, Inc. v. Alaska Mechanical, Inc., 700 F.2d 1026 (5th Cir.1983), cert. denied, 466 U.S. 962 , 104 S.Ct. 2180 , 80 L.Ed.2d 561 (1984) (an exchange of communications in the development of the contract between the forum and foreign state is in itself insufficient to be characterized as a purposeful activity invoking the benefits and protections of the forum state’s laws).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Hafen
v.
United States
v.
United States
No. 83-6525.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 30, 1984.
Cited by 5 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Sixth Circuit (1) · D. Connecticut (1)
C. A. 1st Cir. Certiorari denied.