International Controls Corp. v. Vesco’s Empirical Analysis
490 F.2d 1334 · 1974
Citation profile
73 federal appellate · 19 district · 11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 209 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Flaks v. Koegel (1974), Shapiro v. Lynch (1974)
73 federal appellate · 19 district · 11 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Conley v. Gibson · Bell v. Hood · Pepper v. Litton · Atlantic Coast Line Railroad v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers · Superintendent of Insurance of State of New York v. Bankers Life and Casualty Company
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 209 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]e have stated that, especially in view of the phrase — ‘as the court deems proper’ — the district court may dispense with security where there has been no proof of likelihood of harm to the party enjoined.” (citations omitted)); Doctor’s Assocs., Inc. v. Distajo, 107 F.3d 126, 136 (2d Cir.1997) (”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“The fraudulent scheme need not be hatched in the forum district. Nor is it necessary that a false or deceptive or fraudulent paper be sent or statement made through the use of the mails or interstate communications facilities____ We think that any use of instrumentalities of the mails or other interstate facilities made within the forum district constituting an important step in the execution of the fraudulent, deceitful scheme or in its consummation is sufficient. It is apparent that the language in § 27 ... describing the venue district as “the district wherein any act or transaction constituting the violation occurred” cannot mean the district in which all acts took place, or in which the transaction as a whole was consummated. The statute was one designed to put an end to interstate frauds in the sale and trading of securities. The legislative pattern envisages the likelihood that actions would take place in many places requiring the frequent use of instrumentalities of the mail or of communication. The Act meant to vest jurisdiction in every district where any use of such instrumentalities of the mail or interstate commerce was of material importance to the consummation of the scheme.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Vesco & Co., it appears, was incorporated in Delaware on July 12, 1972 as an estate planning device for Robert Vesco____ The common stock of Vesco & Co. is owned by Patricia Vesco, Vesco’s wife, as custodian for Vesco’s children. The sole asset of Vesco & Co. is the block of [plaintiffs] common stock which, through the additional contributions of Vesco’s children, totals 846,380 shares. Furthermore, we have been advised that the officers of Vesco & Co. are Mrs. Vesco and defendant Shirley Bailey, Vesco’s personal secretary.”
1 later decision 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.