Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 285 FSUPP2D 96 - Baron v. Smith

Baron v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
March 2015
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 4 district ·

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21d of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)

Relies on Basic Inc. v. Levinson · Shaw v. Digital Equipment Corp. · Sundstrand Corp. v. Sun Chemical Corp. · Lawrence Greebel Richard Crane Brian Robinson John Ann Somers v. Ftp Software Inc · Kaufman v. Trump's Castle Funding

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

  1. “(a) [t]o employ any device, scheme or artifice to defraud, (b) [t]o make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or (c) [t]o engage in any act, practice or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “GC Companies, Inc. (N.Y.SE: GCX), parent company of General Cinema Theaters, Inc., announced today that GC Companies and certain of its domestic subsidiaries, including General Cinema Theaters, Inc., are filing voluntary petitions to reorganize their business under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. The Company further stated that certain of its subsidiaries in Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, and Tennessee are filing Chapter 7 liquidation proceedings. The filings were made in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. In its filings, [GCX] will report total assets of $328.9 million and total liabilities of $195.1 million as of August 31, 2000. The Company believes that Chapter 11 reorganization provides the Company with the most effective means to terminate and restructure unprofitable leases and position the Company to succeed in today’s highly competitive market. Through the Chapter 11 process, the Company expects to be able to terminate unprofitable leases, reduce the Company’s operating expenses and make necessary improvements to the business to create a strong competitive future for [GCX]. While the Company completes the restructuring, its operations are expected to continue. The Company is arranging up to $45 million of debtor in possession financing to provide the Company with resources to fund its operations during the Chapter 11 proceedings.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A fact is material if it is substantially likely that the disclosure of the omitted fact would have been viewed by the reasonable investor as having significantly altered the total mix of information made available. Information which would have assumed actual significance in the deliberations of a reasonable shareholder is material. In general, the materiality of a statement or omission is a question of fact that should normally be left to a jury rather than resolved by the court on a motion to dismiss. Thus, we review the complaint only to determine that it pleads the existence of such statements and presents a plausible jury question of materiality.”
    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.