Dale v. Rosenfeld’s Empirical Analysis
229 F.2d 855 · 1956
Citation profile
43 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Myzel v. Fields (1967), Cook v. Avien, Inc. (1978)
43 federal appellate · 2 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. § 77 · 15 U.S.C. § 77B (§ 2 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77M (§ 13 of the Securities Act of 1933)
Relies on Wilko v. Swan · Ex Parte Barber · Creek Nation v. McGhee · Hughes v. Securities & Exchange Commission · Schillner v. H. Vaughan Clarke & Co.
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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Nor can we accept the argument that the statement in the prospectus that “A copy of the Underwriting Agreement may be examined at the offices of the Underwriter” imposes on a purchaser the necessity of examining it to see whether it may supply information the omission of which made the prospectus misleading. Nothing in the words of the prospectus suggested such necessity. If an issuer or underwriter could so simply avoid the risk of a misleading prospectus, the legislative purpose of requiring full disclosure would be defeated and the statute would have little utility. 5”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“it is a firmly entrenched principle of Sec. 12(2) that the '[a]vailability elsewhere of truthful information cannot excuse untruths or misleading omissions' by the seller.”
1 later decision 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.