Gilbert v. Bagley’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 11 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently April 2016 · most notably 88 N.C. App. 484 - Blow v. Shaughnessy (1988), 562 F. Supp. 1180 - Rose v. Arkansas Valley Environmental & Utility Authority (1983)
1 federal appellate · 11 district · 4 state decisions
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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78A (§ 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78B (§ 2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78C (§ 3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78I (§ 9 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78N (§ 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78O (§ 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · International Shoe Co. v. Washington · United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities exchange, (a) To employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud, (b) To make, any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or (c) To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, in connection with the purchase or sale of any security.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence““in the district wherein the defendant is found or is an inhabitant or transacts business or in the district where the offer or sale took place...” 15 U.S.C. § 77v. (Securities Act) “[the district] wherein any act or transaction constituting the violation occurred ... or in the district wherein the defendant is found or is an inhabitant or transacts business ...” 15 U.S.C. § 78aa (Exchange Act) “any district in which such person resides, is found, has an agent, or transacts his affairs.” 18 U.S.C. § 1965 (a) (RICO).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[f]ormer G.S. 55-35 provided that officers and directors stand in a fiduciary relation 'to the corporation and to its shareholders.' The drafters decided not to bring forward the words 'and to its shareholders' in order to avoid an interpretation that there is a duty running directly from directors to the share holders that would give shareholders a direct right of action on claims that should be asserted derivatively.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Browne v. Thompson
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.