Foley v. Allard’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 9 state decisions

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

1. “[E]very broker-dealer or agent who materially aids in the act or transaction constituting the violation, [is] also liable jointly and severally with and to the same extent as [the primary violator, unless the broker-dealer or agent can show:] That [it] did not know, and in the exercise of reasonable care could not have known, of the existence of facts by reason of which the liability is alleged to exist.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State Ex Rel. Goettsch v. Diacide Distributors, Inc. · Schrenker v. State

2. “prong of the test, Foley based her case against Steichen on three to four phone calls Steichen's receptionist took for Allard. No business was transacted in any of these calls, and Foley did not establish a substantial causal connection between the phone calls and her investment loss. Foley was seeing Allard daily-he was a good friend of mutual friends who had wholeheartedly endorsed him to her.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Schrenker v. State

3. “Apparent authority is that authority which a principal holds an agent out as possessing, or knowingly permits an agent to assume.” Foley v. Allard, 427 N.W.2d 647, 652 (Minn.1988). “|T|he proof of the agent's authority must be found in the conduct of the principal, not the agent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 944 F. Supp. 781 - PLYMOUTH FOAM PRODUCTS v. City of Becker, Minn.