Fox v. Prudent Resources Trust’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1993 · most notably Navarro Savings Assn. v. Lee (1980), Somerville v. Major Exploration, Inc. (1983)
4 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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. § 77E (§ 5 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78A (§ 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 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. § 80A · 15 U.S.C. § 80A · 15 U.S.C. § 80B
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Superintendent of Insurance of State of New York v. Bankers Life and Casualty Company · Tcherepnin v. Knight · Securities & Exchange Commission v. National Securities, Inc. · Securities & Exchange Commission v. Capital Gains Research Bureau, 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To deny that plaintiffs have stated a cause of action under Rule 10b-5, defendants must take the position that they may concoct a plan to defraud investors, issue a prospectus to attract investment to the plan and thereafter carry out their fraudulent scheme and yet avoid 10b-5 liability so long as they waited until the public offer was complete before breaching the promises made in the prospectus. So stated, this view of Rule 10b-5 falls of its own weight.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We believe that § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 prohibit all fraudulent schemes in connection with the purchase or sale of securities, whether the artifices employed involve a garden type variety of fraud, or present a unique form of deception.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“In all averments of fraud or mistake, the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake shall be stated with particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge and other condition of mind of a person may be averred generally.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Temple v. Haft
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.