Glick v. Campagna’s Empirical Analysis
613 F.2d 31 · 1979
Citation profile
25 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently October 2010 · most notably Mayer v. Mylod (1993), Sharp v. Coopers & Lybrand (1981)
25 federal appellate · 3 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 Cruz v. Hauck · Parham v. Cortese · Dupuy v. Dupuy · Erckman v. United States · Dupuy v. Dupuy
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(e)xcept as to a party against whom a judgment is entered by default, every final judgment shall grant the relief to which the party in whose favor it is rendered is entitled, even if the party has not demanded such relief in his pleadings.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an adequate foundation for determining the stock's value”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Joe Miller, IV Robert W. Pearce, Jr. v. Asensio & Company, Incorporated, and Manuel P. Asensio Asensio Capital Management Incorporated John Does 1-20, Joe Miller, IV Robert W. Pearce, Jr. v. Asensio & Company, Incorporated, and Manuel P. Asensio Asensio Capital Management Incorporated John Does 1-20 · Miller IV“Preliminarily we note that the stock involved here was that of a small, private corporation, neither registered on any national securities exchange nor required to file reports with the SEC. But despite Campagna’s argument that he and Glick were in reality partners and the transaction was only the sale of a partnership interest, the trial judge properly found that WMFI had conducted its business as a corporation and the sale, in fact, had been of a security. The court was not incorrect in so ruling.”
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.