Holmes v. Bateson’s Empirical Analysis
583 F.2d 542 · 1978
Citation profile
58 federal appellate · 40 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 130 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2023 · most notably Basic Inc. v. Levinson (1988), Shaw v. Digital Equipment Corp. (1996)
58 federal appellate · 40 district · 2 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 United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder · TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc. · Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States · Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co.
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 130 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(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 (e) 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.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A fact, then is “material” if there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable person would consider it important in making an investment decision. The test is an objective one. Moreover, unlike the reliance concept, it does not require a showing that someone was in fact influenced by a particular misrepresentation or omission. Rather, a misrepresentation or omission is “material” if it would in all likelihood influence the investment judgment of a reasonable person.”
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.