Bald Eagle Area School District v. Keystone Financial, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
189 F.3d 321 · 1999
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 7 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Bixler v. Foster (2010), United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. The Infinity Group Company (2000)
11 federal appellate · 7 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
Relies on Blockburger v. United States · Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc · Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Cunningham v. Brown · United States v. Reed
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities exchange, (a) To employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud, (b) To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or (c) To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“Any person injured in his business or property by reason of a violation of section 1962 of this chapter may sue therefor in any appropriate United States district court and shall recover threefold the damages he sustains ..., except that no person may rely upon any conduct that would have been actionable as fraud in the purchase or sale of securities to establish a violation of section 1962.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“First, that in connection with the purchase or sale of [securities] the defendant did any one or more of the following: (1) employed a device, scheme or artifice to defraud, or (2) made an untrue statement of a material fact or omitted to state a material fact which made what was said, under the circumstances, misleading, or (3) engaged in an act, practice or course of business that operated, or would operate, as a fraud or deceit upon a purchaser or seller. Second, that the defendant acted willfully, knowingly and with the intent to defraud. Third, that the defendant knowingly used, or caused to be used, any means or instruments of transportation or communication in interstate commerce or the use of the mails in furtherance of the fraudulent conduct.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.