56 Wash. App. 477 - Aspelund v. Olerich’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently November 2011
10 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
Relies on 93 Wash. 2d 223 - Kittilson v. Ford · 83 Wash. 2d 70 - Clausing v. DeHart · 2 Wash. App. 845 - Shermer v. Baker · 12 Wash. App. 142 - Kaas v. Privette · 82 Wash. 2d 858 - EL COBA CO. v. Franklin Cy. PUD
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is unlawful for any person, in connection with the offer, sale or purchase of any security, directly or indirectly: (1) To employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud; (2) 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 are made, not misleading; or (3) To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“to which a reasonable [person] would attach importance in determining his or her choice of action in the transaction in question.”
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.