Margolies’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently March 2022
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 Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Landgraf v. USI Film Products · Lindh v. Murphy · United States v. Nordic Village, Inc. · Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Unless the evidence is such that reasonable minds may not differ as to its effect, the question as to whether a party has exercised diligence in discovering fraud is for the jury.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“whether the plaintiff `by exercise of reasonable diligence,' should have learned of facts placing him on notice of his claim ... is commonly referred to as inquiry notice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“plaintiffs cannot ignore `storm warnings' that would alert a reasonable investor to the possibility of fraudulent statements or omissions in his securities transaction”
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.