In re Checkosky’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently February 2017
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 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. § 78Y (§ 25 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on In re Martin-Trigona · City of Los Angeles v. Preferred Communications, Inc. · Schenberg v. Bond · Telecommunications Research & Action Center v. Federal Communications Commission · Lewis v. Curtis
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[M]ost courts have held that a petitioner must make a particularized showing that the testimony needs to be taken in advance of the contemplated action.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In the Matter of the Application of Deiulemar Compagnia Di Navigazione S.P.A. For the Perpetuation of Certain Evidence v. M/v Allegra v. Pacific Eternity, S.A. Golden Union Shipping Co. S.A., Movants-Appellants · In the Matter of the Application of Deiulemar Compagnia Di Navigazione Spa for the Perpetuation of Certain Evidence v. M/v Allegra“narrowly-tailored showing of 'the substance of the testimony which the petitioner expects to elicit from each' person to be deposed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“may prevent a failure or delay of justice.”
2 later decisions 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.