Rosenberg v. Gould’s Empirical Analysis
554 F.3d 962 · 2009
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Speaker v. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (2010), Thompson v. Relationserve Media, Inc. (2010)
6 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 78T (§ 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21d of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd. · Bryant v. Avado Brands, Inc. · In Re: Comshare, Incorporated Securities Litigation. Harry M. Hoffman v. Comshare, Inc. · Posner v. Essex Insurance · Stephens v. Department of Health & Human Services
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]here a request for leave to file an amended complaint simply is imbedded within an opposition memorandum, the issue has not been raised properly.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Severe recklessness is limited to those highly unreasonable omissions or misrepresentations that involve not merely simple or even inexcusable negligence, but an extreme departure from the standards of ordinary care, and that present a danger of misleading buyers or sellers which is either known to the defendant or so obvious that the defendant must have been aware of it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where a request for leave to file an amended complaint simply is imbedded within an opposition memorandum, the issue has not been raised properly. [Plaintiffs] also failed to comply with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7(b) when they failed to attach a copy of their proposed amendment or to describe the substance of their proposed amendment.”
1 later decision 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.