371 F. Supp. 2d 476 - Dresner v. Utility. Com, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 77C (§ 3 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 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. § 783 · 15 U.S.C. § 78C (§ 3 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. § 1367
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo · Carol Novak v. Sally Frame · Mills v. Polar Molecular Corp. · Securities & Exchange Commission v. First Jersey Securities, 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Courts have held that Section 29(a) does not prohibit parties from executing valid releases in connection with securities fraud claims that have already matured.”). Aside from a releasing party having”
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.