Rieff v. Evans’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably Mushroom Transportation Company Inc v. H & Pc, HOK Sport, Inc. v. FC Des Moines, L.C. (2007)
5 federal appellate · 16 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 Koster v. Lumbermens Mut Casualty Co · Harhen v. Brown · Kurth v. Van Horn · Rowen v. Le Mars Mut. Ins. Co. of Iowa · Ezzone v. Riccardi
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a confidential or fiduciary relationship exists between the person concealing the cause of action and the aggrieved party, combined with proof that defendant breached the duty of disclosure”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Burtch v. Ganz · In Re: Mushroom Transportation Company, Inc., Debtor. Jeoffrey Burtch Mushroom Transportation Co., Inc. Penn York Realty Company, Inc. Robbey Realty Inc. Trux Enterprises Teamsters Pension Trust Fund of Philadelphia Charles J. Schaffer, Jr. William J. Einhorn Raymond A. Huber Hubert C. Dietrich Robert J. Ewanco William D. Gross Thomas R. Johnston Joseph P. Santone William J. Dillner, Jr. James H. Hutchinson, Jr. John P. O'COnnOr Anthony R. Simones Freight Drivers & Helpers Local 557 Pension Fund Daniel L. Sandy v. Jonathan H. Ganz Pincus Verlin Hahn & Reich, P.C. Pincus Reich Hahn Dubroff & Ganz, P.C. Modell Pincus Hahn & Reich, P.C. Pincus Verlin Bluestein Hahn & Reich, P.C. Astor Weiss & Newman Rawle & Henderson Continental Bank Erwin L. Pincus Richard L. Hahn Pace Reich Jerome J. Verlin Andrew F. Napoli Ronald Bluestein Herman P. Weinberg David N. Bressler Allen B. Dubroff Jeoffrey Burtch, Trustee in Bankruptcy of Mushroom Transportation Company, Inc., Successor to Robbey Realty, Inc., Penn York Realty Company, Inc., and Trux Enterprises, Inc. And Successor to Michael Arnold, Former Trustee in Bankruptcy, Mushroom Transportation Company, Inc., Robbey Realty, Inc., Penn York Realty Company, Inc., and Trux Enterprises, Inc., the Teamsters Pension Trust Fund of Philadelphia and Vicinity, Charles J. Schaffer, Jr., in His Official Capacity as a Fiduciary, by His Successor in Office, William J. Einhorn, Raymond A. Huber, Herbert C. Dietrich, Robert J. Ewanco, William D. Gross, Thomas R. Johnston, Joseph P. Santone, William J. Dillner, Jr., James H. Hutchinson, Jr., John P. O'COnnOr and Anthony R. Simones, Trustees of the Western Pennsylvania, Teamsters and Employers Pension Fund or Their Successors, and Freight Drivers & Helpers Local 557 Pension Fund and Daniel L. Sandy, a Fiduciary, or His Successor and Any Other Named or Deemed Substituted (By Virtue of His Office) or Other Successor“A court should grant a motion to dismiss if the petition fails to state a claim upon which any relief may be granted. In considering a motion to dismiss, the court considers all well-pleaded facts to be true. A court should grant a motion to dismiss only if the petition “ ‘ “on its face shows no right of recovery under any state of facts.” ’ ” Nearly every case will survive a motion to dismiss under notice pleading. Our rules of civil procedure do not require technical forms of pleadings.... A “petition need’ not allege ultimate facts that support each element of the cause of action[;]” however, a petition “must contain factual allegations that give the defendant ‘fair notice’ of the claim asserted so the defendant can adequately respond to the petition.” The “fair' notice” requirement is met if a petition informs the defendant ’ of the incident giving rise to the claim and of the claim’s general nature.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a well-recognized exception to the general rule: a shareholder has an individual cause of action if the harm to the corporation also damaged the shareholder in his capacity as an individual rather than as a shareholder.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Rieff v. Evans
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.