Freudenberg v. E Trade Financial Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 6 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21d of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21e of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Basic Inc. v. Levinson · Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd.
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 50 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A Rule 10b5-l trading plan may give rise to an inference of scienter because a clever insider might maximize their gain from knowledge of an impending price drop over an extended amount of time, and seek to disguise their conduct with a 10b5-1 plan.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where a defendant may have believed that he could eventually sell his shares at a profit by continuing to hide the fraud or by resolving undisclosed problems without the public learning of the true facts, courts refuse to hold that defendants’ stock purchases were inconsistent with fraud.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“any known trends or uncertainties that have had or that the [Company] reasonably expects will have a material favorable or unfavorable impact on net sales or revenues or income from continuing operations.”
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.