Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 428 F.2d 693 - Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 92,683 John Bershad v. Bernard P. McDonough

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 92,683 John Bershad v. Bernard P. McDonough’s Empirical Analysis

428 F.2d 693 · 1970

Citation profile

109
cited by 109 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
August 2018
most recently cited

62 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 109 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Kern County Land Company v. Occidental Petroleum Corporation (1973), Reliance Electric Company v. Emerson Electric Company (1972)

62 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

52019701980199020002010decided

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

Relies on Tcherepnin v. Knight · Securities & Exchange Commission v. National Securities, Inc. · Linkletter v. Walker · Royal Netherlands Steamship Co. v. Strachan Shipping Co. · Blau v. Lehman

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

  1. “'The objective standard of Section 16(b) imposes strict liability upon substantially all transactions occurring within the statutory time period, regardless of the intent of the insider or the existence of actual speculation.'”
    21 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “. . . transactions subject to speculative abuses deserve careful scrutiny. . . . The commercial substance of the transaction rather than its form must be considered, and courts should guard against sham transactions by which an insider disguises the effective transfer of stock.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““The circumstances of the transactions clearly indicate that the stock was effectively transferred, for all practical purposes, long before the exercise of the option. . . . The extent of [the option] payment represented, if not the exercise of the option, a significant deterrent to the abandonment of the contemplated sale. ft”
    2 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.