Druskin v. Answerthink, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78A (§ 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21d of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Relies on Hishon v. King & Spalding · Carol Novak v. Sally Frame · Acito v. IMCERA Group, Inc. · Ganino v. Citizens Utilities Co. · Brooks Jd v. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Florida Inc
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he complaint shall 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.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[d]efendants' alleged desire to meet quarterly projections, find a buyer for the Company, and increase the value of their stock options do not raise a strong inference of scienter”
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.