White v. Sanders’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “§ 75-71-717. Liability to buyers for illegal or fraudulent sales or offers. (a) Any person who (1) offers or sells a security, in violation of Section 75-71-lA7(a), 75-71-301 or 75-71-401, or of any rule or order under Section 75-71-113 which requires the affirmative approval of sales literature before it is used, or of any condition imposed under Section 75-71-405(d) or 75-71-417, or (2) offers or. sells a -security by the use of any written or oral communication which contains any untrue statement of a material fact or any omission to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they are made, not misleading (the buyer not knowing of the untruth or omission),, and who does not sustain the burden of proof that he did not know, and in the exercise of reasonable care could not have known, of the untruth or omission, is liable to the person buying the security from him, who may sue either at law or in equity to recover the consideration paid for the security, together with interest at eight percent (8%) per year from the date of payment, costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees, less the amount of any income received on the security upon the tender of the security, or for damages if he no longer owns the security. Damages are the amount that would be recoverable upon a .tender less the value of the security when the buyer disposed of it and interest at eight per cent, (8%) per year from the date of disposition.-”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 825 F. Supp. 1265 - Fortenberry v. Foxworth Corp.

2. ““Upon tender of the security, the purchaser may recover the consideration paid for the security and interest at the legal rate of this State from the date of payment, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees as determined by the court, less the amount of income received on the security.... A purchaser who no longer owns the security may recover damages. Damages are the amount that would be recoverable upon a tender less the value of the security when the purchaser disposed of it, plus interest at the legal rate of this State from the date of disposition of the security, costs, and reasonable attorney’s fees determined by the court.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 918 So. 2d 897 - Morgan Keegan Co., Inc. v. Cunningham

3. “[a]ny similarity between the damages remedy available to [the plaintiff] under section 10(b) and the rescission remedy available under the Georgia Security Act; of 1957 is therefore, at best,'uncertain. By contrast, there is no reason to doubt that Georgia’s general fraud statute would support an action for money damages based on the churning of [the plaintiffs] account.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 825 F. Supp. 1265 - Fortenberry v. Foxworth Corp.