608 F. Supp. 759 - Tabas v. Mullane’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
5 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently January 2002
5 district · 3 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005)
Relies on Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Landis v. North American Co. · Brillhart v. Excess Insurance Co. of America · In re Kauffman Mutual Fund Actions · Meredith v. City of Winter Haven
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.
“must decide whether, under the particularized facts alleged, a reasonable doubt is created that: (1) the directors are disinterested and independent and (2) the challenged transaction was otherwise a product of a valid exercise of business judgment. Hence, the [court] must make two inquiries, one into the independence and disinterestedness of the directors and.the other into the substantive nature of the challenged transaction and the board’s approval thereof.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Shields v. Murphy
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.