Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 765 F.2d 1004 - Woods v. Barnett Bank

Woods v. Barnett Bank’s Empirical Analysis

765 F.2d 1004 · 1985

Citation profile

116
cited by 116 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
May 2023
most recently cited

52 federal appellate · 7 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 116 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2023 · most notably Hollinger, Barker v. Henderson, Franklin, Starnes & Holt (1986)

52 federal appellate · 7 district ·

46019851990200020102020decided

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. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)

Relies on Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder · Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States · Herman & MacLean v. Huddleston

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

  1. “an extreme departure from the standards of ordinary care, and ... present[ing] a danger of misleading buyers or sellers which is either known to the defendant or is so obvious that the defendant must have been aware of it.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Mindful of the potentially devastating impact aiding and abetting liability might have on commercial relationships,”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A] person may be held as an aider and abettor only if ... the accused party had general awareness that his role was part of an overall activity that is improper, and if the accused aider-abettor knowingly and substantially assisted the violation.”
    3 later decisions 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.