Schreiber v. Burlington Northern, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
731 F.2d 163 · 1984
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions
Appellate journey
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78N (§ 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder · Santa Fe Industries, Inc. v. Green · Piper v. Chris-Craft Industries, Inc. · Edgar v. Mite Corp. · 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“to provide that for the purposes of such Plan a participant shall be deemed to have retired at the instance of the Company if his duties as a director, officer or employee of the Company have been diminished or curtailed by the Company in any material respect.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“enacted principally as a disclosure statute, designed to insure that fully-informed investors could intelligently decide how to respond to a tender offer.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“§ 14(e) was not intended to create a federal cause of action for all harms suffered because of the proffering or the withdrawal of tender offers.”
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.