Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 35 F.3d 1407 - Miller v. Pezzani

Miller v. Pezzani’s Empirical Analysis

35 F.3d 1407 · 1994

Citation profile

301
cited by 301 later decisions
3
states following
March 2023
most recently cited

94 federal appellate · 37 district · 6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 301 later decisions — most recently March 2023 · most notably Janas v. McCracken (1999), Shaw v. Digital Equipment Corp. (1996)

94 federal appellate · 37 district · 6 state decisions

14301994200020102020decided

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. § 771 (CAN-SPAM Act of 2003) · 15 U.S.C. § 77K (§ 11 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77O (§ 15 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)

Relies on Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder · Basic Inc. v. Levinson · Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Holmes v. Securities Investor Protection Corporation · Reves v. Ernst & Young

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

  1. “'provides a mechanism by which a court can rule as a matter of law that defendants' forward-looking representations contained enough cautionary language or risk disclosure to protect the defendant against claims of securities fraud.'”
    23 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “that the accounting practices were so deficient that the audit amounted to no audit at all, or an egregious refusal to see the obvious, or to investigate the doubtful, or that the accounting judgments which were made were such that no reasonable accountant would have made the same decisions if confronted with the same facts.”
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “company that 'substantially overstate[s] its revenues by reporting consignment transactions as sales ... mak[es] false or misleading statements of material fact.'”
    4 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.