Lerner v. Lerner’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 38 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently September 2011 · most notably Ehrlich v. Perez (2006), LeJeune v. Coin Acceptors, Inc. (2004)
6 federal appellate · 4 district · 38 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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1 (§ 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act)
Relies on Midlantic National Bank v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection · The Canal Authority of the State of Florida v. Howard H. Callaway, Secretary of the United States Army, the Cross-Florida Canal Association v. Howard H. Callaway, Secretary of the United States Army, Eleanor H. Miller v. Avery S. Fullerton, Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Corps of Engineers of the United States Army, J. G. Perko v. The Canal Authority of the State of Florida, Etc. · Blackwelder Furniture Co. of Statesville, Inc. v. Seilig Manufacturing Co. · Hamilton Watch Co. v. Benrus Watch Co. · Weinberger v. UOP, 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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t will ordinarily be enough that the plaintiff has raised questions going to the merits so serious, substantial, difficult and doubtful, as to make them fair ground for litigation and thus for more deliberate investigation.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“within the meaning of Maryland corporation law, was organized in 1965. It was authorized to issue ninety-five shares of no-par common stock. Theodore acquired seventy shares, and Lawrence acquired twenty-five shares. Theodore was president and one of three directors. Prior to September 1983, Lawrence was secretary and a director. The brothers' relationship deteriorated, and in September 1983, Theodore caused Lawrence to be removed as an officer and director. Lawrence sued Theodore, Theodore undertook to”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Discord within a closely held, general business corporation can conceivably reach the point where eliminating a dissonant minority’s interest would not violate the majority’s duty to the minority, particularly where matters of business judgment are the subject of controver sy and the discord is impairing the corporation’s ability to conduct business.”
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.