Halperin v. Jasper’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc · Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson · Hj Inc v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Company · Agency Holding Corporation v. Malley-Duff & Associates Inc Crown Life Insurance Company · Data Access Systems Securities Litigation Tolins Lowenfels Kahlowsky and Co
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[D]efendant contends that if plaintiffs’ securities claims are barred by the statute of limitations, the RICO is likewise barred, since the alleged § 10(b) and Rule 10(b)(5) violations are the predicate acts upon which the RICO claims are based.... [Tjhere does not appear to be any authority for the proposition that predicate acts which are cognizable independent claims, substantively, but which are barred by the statute of limitations, cannot serve as predicate acts for a RICO claim.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“a plaintiff is always required to prove a pattern of racketeering activity, and the existence of one or more enterprises, the activities of which affect interstate commerce.”
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.