Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 722 F.2d 1 - Data Probe Acquisition Corp. v. Datatab, Inc.

Data Probe Acquisition Corp. v. Datatab, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

722 F.2d 1 · 1983

Citation profile

71
cited by 71 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
1
states following
May 2024
most recently cited

30 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 71 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2024 · most notably Kramer v. Time Warner Inc. (1991), Schreiber v. Burlington Northern, Inc. (1985)

30 federal appellate · 5 district · 3 state decisions

38019831990200020102020decided

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. § 78M (§ 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78N (§ 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)

Relies on Santa Fe Industries, Inc. v. Green · Piper v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc. · Edgar v. Mite Corp. · ITT Gilfillan v. Clayton · Rondeau v. Mosinee Paper Corp.

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

  1. “is not a rite of confession or exercise in common law pleading.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “embark ... on a course leading to a federal common law of fiduciary obligations.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[T]he proxy materials sent ... described the guarantees of employment negotiated by [interested directors] and thus disclosed their conflict of interest. We see no additional informational benefit accruing to shareholders by requiring the beneficiaries of such contracts to announce that they regard them favorably.... The disclosure required by the Act is not a rite of confession or exercise in common law pleading. What is required is the disclosure of material objective factual matters.”
    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.