Emi Limited v. Bennett H’s Empirical Analysis
738 F.2d 994 · 1984
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2005 · most notably Franchise Tax Board of California v. Alcan Aluminium Ltd. (1990), K-B Trucking Company v. Riss International Corporation (1985)
15 federal appellate · 3 district · 1 state decisions
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 28 U.S.C. § 1341 · 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Civil Rights Act of 1871 / Section 1983 (Ku Klux Klan Act))
Relies on Warth v. Seldin · Simon v. Eastern Kentucky Welfare Rights Organization · Container Corp. of America v. Franchise Tax Board · Akers v. United States · Israel v. Futuronics 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In its constitutional dimension, standing imports justiciability: whether the plaintiff has made out a “case or controversy” between himself and the defendant within the meaning of Art. III. This is the threshold question in every federal case, determining the power of the court to entertain the suit. As an aspect of justiciability, the standing question is whether the plaintiff has “alleged such a personal stake in the outcome of the controversy” as to warrant his invocation of federal-court jurisdiction and to justify exercise of the court’s remedial powers on his behalf.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“To have standing to maintain an action, a shareholder must assert more than personal economic injury resulting from a wrong to the corporation. A shareholder must be injured directly and independently of the corporation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Generally, a shareholder does not have standing to redress an injury to the corporation in which it holds stock.”
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.