Cary Lapidus v. G. Randall Hecht’s Empirical Analysis
232 F.3d 679 · 2000
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Strougo v. Bassini (2002), Ball v. Rodgers (2007)
11 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc. · Burks v. Lasker · Branch v. Tunnell · Kramer v. Western Pacific Industries, Inc. · Kelson v. City of Springfield
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) No registered investment company shall, unless authorized by a vote of a majority of its outstanding voting securities— (1) change its subclassification as defined in section 80a-5(a)(l) and (2) of this title or its subclassification from a diversified to a non-diversified company; (2) borrow money, issue senior securities, underwrite securities issued by other persons, purchase or sell real estate or commodities or make loans to other persons, except in each case in accordance with the recitals of policy contained in its registration statement in respect thereto; (3) deviate from its policy in respect of concentration of investments in any particular industry or group of industries as recited in its registration statement, deviate from any investment policy which is changeable only if authorized by shareholder vote, or deviate from any policy recited in its registration statement pursuant to section 80a-8(b)(3) of this title; or (4) change the nature of its business so as to cease to be an investment company.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“A shareholder does not acquire standing to maintain a direct action when the alleged injury is inflicted on the corporation and the only injury to the shareholder is the indirect harm which consists of the diminution in the value of his or her shares.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“documents whose contents are alleged in a complaint and whose authenticity no party questions, but which are not physically attached to the pleading.”
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.