Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 253 F.3d 423 - Alfred Ronconi v. C. Raymond Larkin, Jr.

Alfred Ronconi v. C. Raymond Larkin, Jr.’s Empirical Analysis

253 F.3d 423 · 2001

Citation profile

222
cited by 222 later decisions
2
states following
November 2024
most recently cited

48 federal appellate · 19 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 222 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp. (2009), Daou Systems Inc v. V W (2005)

48 federal appellate · 19 district · 2 state decisions

1380200120102020decided

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 DiLeo v. Ernst & Young · Acito v. IMCERA Group, Inc. · Janas v. McCracken · Decker v. Glenfed, Inc. · Schneider v. Vennard

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 222 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “) (facts must come closer to demonstrating intent as opposed to mere motive and opportunity). The stricter standard for pleading scienter naturally results in a stricter standard for pleading falsity, because "`falsity and scienter in private securities fraud cases are generally strongly inferred from the same set of facts,' and the two requirements may be combined into a unitary inquiry under the PSLRA.”
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “specify each statement alleged to have been misleading, the reason or reasons why the statement is misleading, and, if an allegation regarding the statement or omission is made on information and belief, the complaint shall state with particularity all facts on which that belief is formed.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “state with particularity facts giving rise to a strong inference that the defendant acted with the required state of mind.”
    10 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.