136 F. Supp. 939 - Kaufman v. Wolfson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * * If, as was said in the Cohen opinion [ 337 U.S. 541 , 69 S.Ct. 1221 , 93 L.Ed. 1528 , supra], Rule 23(b) prevents suit in the federal court by a group of subsequent purchasers all by themselves even though the state law would have permitted it, I can perceive ho reason why Rule 23(b) should not prevent suit in the federal court by a group of subsequent purchasers and one contemporaneous owner even though the state law would have permitted it. “If the question of adding plaintiffs to make up a requisite aggregate value of stock held by plaintiffs had never come up, no one would have had the temerity to argue that Rule 23(b), F.R.C.P. permitted the joinder of plaintiffs who did not own stock at the time of the alleged injury. The mere fact that the New York courts construe the New York statutes as permitting such joinder for the purpose of making up the requisite $50,000 worth, has no tendency to alter the construction of Rule 23(b).””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 147 F. Supp. 609 - Elkins v. Bricker