Wright v. Heizer Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Pepper v. Litton · Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co. · J. I. Case Co. v. Borak · Ross v. Bernhard
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e must be mindful of the [Supreme] Court's function in hearing and deciding ... cases. It does not sit to adjudicate individual disputes; that is the business of the district courts and courts of appeal. Rather it uses individual cases and controversies to shape and guide the development of the law. This is particularly true where, as here, it speaks in an area of judge made law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cowin v. Bresler“shareholders, creditors, and perhaps others related to an issuer who suffered loss in the value of their investment due to corporate or insider activities in connection with the purchase or sale of securities which violate Rule 10b-5.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Cowin v. Bresler“breach of trust by corporate fiduciaries clearly falls within (the) ambit”
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.