Rose v. Dobras’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 6 district · 37 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Standard Chartered PLC v. Price Waterhouse (1997), Davis v. Metro Productions, Inc. (1989)
6 federal appellate · 6 district · 37 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
Relies on TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc. · Securities & Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co. · Tcherepnin v. Knight · Acosta v. United States · Dalehite 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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A misstatement of omitted fact is material if there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable purchaser or seller would consider it important in deciding whether or not to purchase or sell. It does not require proof of a substantial likelihood that disclosure of the misstatement or omitted fact would have caused the reasonable investor not to purchase or sell the security. What the standard does contemplate is a showing of a substantial likelihood that, under all the circumstances, the misstatement or omitted fact would have assumed actual significance in the deliberations of the reasonable investor. Put another way, there must be a substantial likelihood that the disclosure of the misstatement or omitted fact would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the ‘total mix’ of information made available.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[e]mploy any device, scheme or artifice to defraud”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Where a purchaser seeks rescission of an unlawful sale of securities, the general view is that tender to the issuer or to the court at the commencement of the action is sufficient.”
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.