O'Neil v. Appel’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 14 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Unger v. Amedisys Inc. (2005), In re Sumitomo Copper Litigation (1998)
3 federal appellate · 14 district ·
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. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78T (§ 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 28 U.S.C. § 1407 · 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Thomas v. Arn · Eisen v. Carlisle & Jacquelin · General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. Falcon · Coopers & Lybrand v. Livesay · Basic Inc. v. Levinson
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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is impossible to accord much significance to the number of market makers, until one knows the volume of shares that they committed to trade, the volume of shares they actually traded, and the prices at which they did so. The economic literature has criticized reliance upon the number of market makers as an indicator of efficiency.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“If the presumption [of reliance] applies [under a fraud-on-the-market theory], a class action is much easier to maintain because individual proof of reliance is not necessary. In the absence of such a presumption, individual issues are more likely to predominate.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the questions of law or fact common to the members of the class predominate over any questions affecting only individual members, and that a class action is superi- or to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Krogman v. Sterritt
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.