Frazier v. Manson’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
3 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78C (§ 3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Securities & Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co. · Tcherepnin v. Knight · International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. Daniel · Gagnon v. Scarpelli
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The District Court properly concluded that Frazier's managerial rights negated the possibility that his limited partnership interests were securities. An investor does not always need the extensive protection of the federal securities laws when he or she has partial control of an enterprise.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Masel v. Villarreal“participate actively in the daily business operations of both [Manson-Frazier Companies] and the limited partnerships,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Masel v. Villarreal“segregate Frazier's limited partnership interests from his status as a partner in [Manson-Frazier Companies].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Masel v. Villarreal
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.