Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 710 F.2d 711 - Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,428

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 99,428’s Empirical Analysis

1983

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
3
states following
August 2016
most recently cited

4 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently August 2016 · most notably 826 F. Supp. 1019 - In Re Catfish Antitrust Litigation (1993), 572 F. Supp. 667 - Taylor v. Bear Stearns & Co. (1983)

4 district · 3 state decisions

2301983199020002010decided

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 Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder · Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Herman & MacLean v. Huddleston · Santa Fe Industries, Inc. v. Green · Superintendent of Insurance of State of New York v. Bankers Life and Casualty Company

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

  1. “One or more members of a class may sue or be sued as representative parties on behalf of all only if (1) the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, (2) there are questions of law or fact common to the class, (3) the claims or defenses of the representative parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class, and (4) the representative parties will fairly and adequately protect the interests of the class.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “... the questions of law or fact common to the members of the class predominate over any questions affecting only individual members, and that a class action is superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of the controversy. The matters pertinent to the findings include: (A) the interest of members of the class in individually controlling the prosecution or defense of separate actions; (B) the extent and nature of any litigation concerning the controversy already commenced by or against members of the class; (C) the desirability or undesirability of concentrating the litigation of the claims in the particular forum; (D) the difficulties likely to be encountered in the management of a class action.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[The named plaintiff’s] claim is not an individual, separate grievance____ He ... alleged that appellants committed various illegal acts in perpetrating the fraud, including the failure to disclose material facts in the ... prospectuses. In other words, [the named plaintiff] claimed and later proved that appellants committed the same unlawful acts in the same method against an entire class. Thus, all members of this class have identical claims.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.