108 Wis. 2d 521 - State v. Temby’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably State v. Larsen (1993), 187 Wis. 2d 96 - Nischke v. Farmers & Merchants Bank & Trust (1994)
23 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 15 U.S.C. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933)
Relies on Barber v. Page · Aaron v. Securities & Exchange Commission · United States v. Balint · Horning v. District of Columbia · Easton v. United States
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he plain meaning of the statutory provisions indicate that the State need only prove that the accused willfully engaged in conduct which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person. It is the nature of the act which is dispos-itive, not the state of mind of the actor. In this sense, the statute imposes a form of strict liability. Once the seller has willfully engaged in conduct which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit, he will not be heard to argue that he did not intend the consequences of his acts.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“Any person who wilfully violates any provision of this chapter except s. 551.54, or any rule under this chapter, or any order of which the person has notice, or who violates s. 551.54 knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the statement made was false or misleading in any material respect, may be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than. 5 years or both. Each of the acts specified shall constitute a separate offense and a prosecution or conviction for any one of such offenses shall not bar prosecution or conviction for any other offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“So here, as the defendant knowingly committed the acts charged as violations of the sections of the Blue Sky Law involved, his acts were done wilfully, and the intent he entertained when he committed the acts, other than an intent not to commit them, cannot excuse his violation of the statute. Where the legislature has prohibited, under a penalty, the doing of a specific act,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.