Calcutti v. SBU, INC.’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1338
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Scheuer v. Rhodes · Hishon v. King & Spalding · Leatherman v. Tarrant County Narcotics Intelligence and Coordination Unit · Central Bank of Denver Na v. First Interstate Bank of Denver Na K
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the factual allegations in the complaint, which are accepted as true; (2) documents attached to the complaint as an exhibit or incorporated ... by reference; (3) matters of which judicial notice may be taken; and (4) documents upon-whose terms and effect the complaint relies heavily, ie,, documents that are “integral” to the complaint.-”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) the existence of a primary violation; (2) knowledge of this violation on the part of the aider and abettor; and (3) substantial assistance by the aider and abettor in the achievement of the primary violation.”
2 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.