Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 542 F.3d 776 - South Ferry LP v. Killinger

South Ferry LP v. Killinger’s Empirical Analysis

542 F.3d 776 · 2008

Citation profile

125
cited by 125 later decisions
April 2024
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 13 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 125 later decisions — most recently April 2024 · most notably Zucco Partners, LLC v. Digimarc Corp. (2009), Nursing Home Pension Fund, Local 144 v. Oracle Corp. (2010)

27 federal appellate · 13 district ·

980200820102020decided

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. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21d of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 28 U.S.C. § 1292

Relies on Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd. · Janas v. McCracken · Berson v. Applied Signal Technology, Inc. · Read-Rite Corp v. J G H III · Sparling v. Daou

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

  1. “[A]llegations regarding management's role in a company may ... help to satisfy the PSLRA scienter requirement in three circumstances”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Allegations regarding management's role in a corporate structure and the importance of the corporate information about which management made false or misleading statements may also create a strong inference of scienter when made in conjunction with detailed and specific allegations about management's exposure to factual information within the company.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a court should look to the complaint as a whole, not to each individual scienter allegation as Silicon Graphics suggests. Thus, Tellabs counsels us to consider the totality of circumstances, rather than to develop separately rules of thumb for each type of scienter allegation.... Vague or ambiguous allegations are now properly considered as a part of a holistic review when considering whether the complaint raises a strong inference of scienter.... In assessing the allegations holistically as required by Tellabs, the federal courts certainly need not close their eyes to circumstances that are probative of scienter viewed with a practical and common-sense perspective.”
    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.