Pell v. Weinstein’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 77 · 15 U.S.C. § 77B (§ 2 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77D (§ 4 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77E (§ 5 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77M (§ 13 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77Z (§ 26 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc · Hospital Building Co. v. Trustees of Rex Hospital · Securities & Exchange Commission v. Ralston Purina Co. · Moss v. Morgan Stanley Inc.
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Pennsylvania, an action for professional negligence cannot be maintained unless there is privity of contract between the parties.... The plaintiffs argue that the current business environment demands the establishment of a new benchmark for accountant liability in Pennsylvania which abandons the requirement of privity. However, this is an argument more properly presented to the Pennsylvania courts. It is beyond question that under current Pennsylvania law, privity is required in an action for professional negligence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[s]uch a conditional commitment is not what the courts had in mind when setting the time of commitment as the critical point for antifraud analysis. It is not some magical incantation of “commitment” that sets the point at which disclosure is no longer mandated, but rather the nature of the commitment.... [T]he commitment must irrevocably bind the parties to them agreement, without regard to further action or inaction on their part.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the sale could not possibly have been made by means of [the] prospectus”
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.