Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 778 F.3d 857 - Donner v. Nicklaus

Donner v. Nicklaus’s Empirical Analysis

778 F.3d 857 · 2015

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
November 2017
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1701 (Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914) · 15 U.S.C. § 1702 · 15 U.S.C. § 1703

Relies on Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Richards v. United States · Sutton II v. Utah State School for the Deaf and Blind 1-5 1-5 · United International Holdings, Inc. v. Wharf (Holdings) Ltd. · American Towers Owners Ass'n v. CCI Mechanical, 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The brochure describes a charter membership based on the $1.5 million purchase price. Mr. Nicklaus’s “founding membership” was “honorary,” meaning he paid nothing. Though “charter membership” and “founding membership” may ordinarily be synonymous, the price difference (free versus $1.5 million) could have struck the Donners as significant. The Donners allege in the amended complaint that they were induced to act by Mr. Nicklaus’s willingness to pay $1.5 million for his charter membership. It was the purchase price, rather than the title of the membership, that allegedly influenced the Donners.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “An action may be brought within three years for relief on the ground of fraud or mistake; except that the cause of action does not accrue until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud or mistake.”
    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.