Cramer v. General Telephone & Electronics’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 1 district ·

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

1. “The rule provides that when a court of competent jurisdiction has entered a final judgment on the merits of a cause of action, the parties to the suit and their privies are thereafter bound “not only as to every matter which was offered and received to sustain or defeat the claim on demand, but as to any other admissible matter which might have been offered for that purpose.” 1”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 451 F. Supp. 96 - Sworob v. Harris · 450 F. Supp. 1349 - Raitport v. General Motors Corp.

2. “). The district court concluded that GTE had bought or sold securities within the meaning of § 10(b) and thus that Cramer had standing to assert the claim on behalf of the corporation. 16 Nevertheless, the court dismissed the § 10(b) claim for three reasons: 29 Cramer's § 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 claims against the defendants fail when the court asks whether the manipulative devices, the alleged fraud and the alleged breaches of fiduciary duty were”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Cramer v. General Telephone & Electronics Corp.

3. “establish standing under § 18. There is no allegation that the corporation relied on any false or misleading filings in making any sale; there is .no allegation that any filing affected the price of GTE securities. Finally, there is no causal nexus made, or even attempted, between any filing and any alleged loss which GTE suffered.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Kaplan v. Bennett