Burns v. Prudential Securities’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

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

1. “(A) a misrepresentation or omission of a material fact in connection with the purchase or sale of a covered security; or (B) that the defendant used or employed any manipulative or deceptive device or other contrivance in connection with the purchase or sale of a covered security.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 167 Ohio App. 3d 809 - Burns v. Prudential Securities, Inc. · 315 F. Supp. 2d 954 - Magyery v. Transamerica Financial Advisors, Inc.

2. “in connection with the purchase or sale of a covered security,”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ongstad v. Piper Jaffray & Co. · Riley v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.

3. “[T]his case involves an allegation of one instance of unauthorized trading. While this may sustain conversion, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, or negligence claims, it does not suggest, much less strongly so as is mandated by PSLRA, that [the defendant] meant to defraud plaintiffs by liquidating their accounts. Only additional “facts giving rise to a strong inference” that (the defendant) acted with intent to defraud could support a tenable securities fraud claim.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 124 F. Supp. 2d 229 - Prager v. Knight/Trimark Group, Inc.