Puma v. Marriott’s Empirical Analysis
1971
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 3 district · 21 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently May 2013 · most notably Aronson v. Lewis (1984), Weinberger v. UOP, Inc. (1983)
8 federal appellate · 3 district · 21 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 33 Del. Ch. 293 - Sterling v. Mayflower Hotel Corp. · Sinclair Oil Corporation v. Levien · Beard v. Elster · 35 Del. Ch. 479 - Johnston v. Greene · Fidanque v. American Maracaibo 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[S]ince the transaction complained of was accomplished as a result of the exercise of independent business judgment of the outside, independent directors whose sole interest was the furtherance of the corporate enterprise, the court is precluded from substituting its uninformed opinion for that of the experienced, independent board members. .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““* * * There is no testimony which even tends to show that the terms of the transaction were dictated by the Marriott Group or any member thereof. On the contrary, the valuations of the property companies and the Marriott stock were made by a majority of Marriott directors, whose independence is unchallenged, based upon appraisals, analysis, information and opinions provided by independent experts, whose qualifications are not questioned. In these circumstances it cannot be said that the Marriott Group stood ‘on both sides of the transaction’ within the meaning of the rule followed in the case above cited. * * *” (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.