Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 511 F.2d 504 - Tomera v. Galt

Tomera v. Galt’s Empirical Analysis

511 F.2d 504 · 1975

Citation profile

235
cited by 235 later decisions
2
states following
September 2013
most recently cited

57 federal appellate · 28 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 235 later decisions — most recently September 2013 · most notably Haroco, Inc. v. American National Bank & Trust Co. (1984), Hobson v. Wilson (1984)

57 federal appellate · 28 district · 2 state decisions

141019751980199020002010decided

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 · Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States · Holmberg v. Armbrecht · Securities & Exchange Commission v. Capital Gains Research Bureau, Inc. · Bailey Assignee v. Glover et al.

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

  1. “In all averments of fraud or mistake, the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake shall be stated with particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge, and other condition of mind of a person may be averred generally.”
    17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “At least two types of fraudulent behavior toll a statutory period. Bailey v. Glover, 21 [88 U.S.] Wall 342, 22 L.Ed. 636 (1875). In the first type, the most common, the fraud goes undiscovered even though the defendant after commission of the wrong does nothing to conceal it and the plaintiff has diligently inquired into its circumstances. The plaintiff’s due diligence is essential here.... In the second type, the fraud goes undiscovered because the defendant has taken positive steps after commission of the fraud to keep it concealed.... This type of fraudulent concealment tolls the limitations period until actual discovery by the plaintiff.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Her first amended complaint notified defendants of the nature of her claims, a rule 10b-5 securities fraud, and it alleged the details, a brief sketch of how the fraudulent scheme operated, when and where it occurred, and the participants. This is enough. More information can be gathered through discovery.”
    6 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.