Stokes v. Lokken’s Empirical Analysis
644 F.2d 779 · 1981
Citation profile
38 federal appellate · 18 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 102 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2019 · most notably Pinter v. Dahl (1988), 109 Wash. 2d 107 - Haberman v. Washington Public Power Supply System (1988)
38 federal appellate · 18 district · 8 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 15 U.S.C. § 771 (CAN-SPAM Act of 2003) · 15 U.S.C. § 77A (§ 1 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77E (§ 5 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder · Avis Rent A Car System, Inc. v. City of Chicago · United States v. California · Harris v. Oklahoma · Blyth, Eastman Dillon & Co. v. Rolf
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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the existence of a securities law violation by the primary party (as opposed to the aiding and abetting party); (2) "knowledge" of the violation on the part of the aider and abettor; and (3) "substantial assistance" by the aider and abettor in the achievement of the primary violation. Stokes v. Lokken, 644 F.2d 779, 782-783 (8th Cir.1981); see also ITT, An International Investment Trust v. Cornfeld, 619 F.2d 909, 922 (2d Cir.1980); Monsen v. Consolidated Dressed Beef Co., 579 F.2d 793, 799 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 439 U.S. 930 , 99 S.Ct. 318 , 58 L.Ed.2d 323 (1978).”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“no genuine issue as to any material fact [exists] and ... the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“substantial factor in causing the transaction to take place.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Farley v. Henson · Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,005 Don Farley Robert Mendenhall v. William R. Henson, Jr. Paul M. Henson Bowes Lyon Resources Ltd. National Transport Services, Inc., Westark Specialties, Inc., Don Farley Robert Mendenhall v. William R. Henson, Jr., Paul M. Henson, Bowes Lyon Resources Ltd. National Transport Services, Inc. Westark Specialties, Inc.
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.