Sterlin v. Biomune Systems’s Empirical Analysis
154 F.3d 1191 · 1998
Citation profile
28 federal appellate · 19 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 106 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2016 · most notably Joel Rothman v. Andrew Gregor (2000), Lentell v. Merrill Lynch & Co. (2005)
28 federal appellate · 19 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. § 78A (§ 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78I (§ 9 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78T (§ 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Irwin v. Department of Veterans Affairs · Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson · Bailey Assignee v. Glover et al. · Kennedy v. Josephthal & Co. · Cook v. Avien, Inc.
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 106 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e conclude that whether the [plaintiffs'] claim against[defendant] is time-barred turns on when, after obtaining inquiry notice ..., the [plaintiffs], in the exercise of reasonable diligence, should have discovered the facts underlying the alleged fraud....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“`the applicable statute of limitations should not precipitate groundless or premature suits by requiring plaintiffs to file suit before they can discover with the exercise of reasonable diligence the necessary facts to support their claims,'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[I]nquiry notice does not begin to run unless and until the investor is able, with the exercise of reasonable diligence (whether or not actually exercised), to ascertain the information needed to file suit.”
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.