Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 445 F.2d 369 - Rose Moses v. C. Rodgers Burgin

Rose Moses v. C. Rodgers Burgin’s Empirical Analysis

445 F.2d 369 · 1971

Citation profile

81
cited by 81 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

42 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 81 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2016 · most notably Burks v. Lasker (1979), Johnson v. Moses (1972)

42 federal appellate · 8 district · 1 state decisions

45019711980199020002010decided

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 J. I. Case Co. v. Borak · Silver v. New York Stock Exchange · Eaton v. Hobson · Esplin v. Hirschi · Colonial Realty Corp. v. Bache & Co.

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

  1. “could be thought to be of possible significance”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““We do not denigrate these principles, though we need hold relevant only their expression through the federally imposed standard under section 36, which may vary from the state common law.” Moses v. Burgin, supra, 445 F.2d at 376.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “under a duty of full disclosure of information to . . . unaffiliated directors in every area where there was even a possible conflict of interest between their interests and the interests of the fund”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.