In re Computer Memories Litigation’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably 24 Cal. 4th 906 - Wash. Mut. Bank v. Superior Court of Orange Cty. (2001), Mazza v. American Honda Motor Co. (2012)
2 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 15 U.S.C. § 771 (CAN-SPAM Act of 2003) · 15 U.S.C. § 77K (§ 11 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp. · Ohio Bureau of Employment Services v. Hodory · Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts · Federal Communications Commission v. Home Box Office, Inc. · Smith v. Harmsen
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Character attacks made by opponents to a class certification motion and not combined with a showing of a conflict of interest have generally not been sympathetically received in this district, [citation omitted.] Although, the focus of the adequacy determination has been on the competency of counsel and the absence of antagonistic interests between class representatives and class members, not on the personal integrity of class representatives [citation omitted.], it is self-evident that a Court must be concerned with the integrity of individuals it designates as representatives for a large class of plaintiffs.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Leyva v. Buley“it is self-evident that a Court must be concerned with the integrity of individuals it designates as representatives for a large class of plaintiffs”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“questions of personal integrity are but one factor the Court must consider in making the adequacy determination.”
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.