436 F. Supp. 895 - Weitzman v. Stein’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Over the years, [in pari delicto] has proved simple enough in application in purely private disputes between private parties. However, the legislative adoption of comprehensive regulatory schemes, such as the federal securities laws, designed at least in part for the very purpose of aiding and protecting injured plaintiffs, has complicated matters. Since these legislative enactments, the defense of in pari delicto can no longer be considered solely within the framework of traditional equity concepts. In addition to examining the relative culpability of the plaintiff, the courts must also ask whether the application of the doctrine would further the policies behind the federal securities laws, given the particular facts of the case. This additional inquiry has given pause, and the courts have allowed the defense only with caution.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Wolken v. Erck

2. “It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails, or of any facility of a national securities exchange, (a) to employ any device, scheme or artifice to defraud, (b) to make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or (c) to engage in any act, practice or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 582 F. Supp. 485 - Jaksich v. Thomson McKinnon Securities, Inc.

3. “(1) the use of a means or instrumentality of interstate commerce or of the mails in a scheme to defraud; (2) material misrepresentations or omission by the defendants of material facts; (3) an intent to deceive, manipulate or defraud plaintiff (scienter); (4) reliance by plaintiff upon defendants’ misrepresentations; and (5) damages suffered by plaintiff as a result of his reliance or due to the fraudulent scheme.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. EF Hutton & Co., Inc. v. Penham