McCoy v. Goldberg’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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.

1. “[T]he Third-Party Complaint clearly alleges that ‘Third-Party Defendants, in connection with plaintiffs purchase of the units ... employed devices, schemes or artifices to defraud, made untrue statements of material facts and omitted to state other material facts ... all in violation of Section 10(b) of the 1934 Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.’ T.P.C. ¶ 39. The Third-Party Complaint also alleges that Phoenix Leasing ‘had actual knowledge’ of its allegedly false and misleading statements and that ‘[plaintiffs losses were proximately caused by third-party defendants’ representations and omissions.’ Id. As Judge Haight noted in Greene , the wrong to be deterred by the federal securities laws is fraud in the connection with the sale and purchase of securities. See Greene, 102 F.R.D. at 36 ; see also Department of Economic Dev., [747 F.Supp.] at 933. Here, the Third-Party Complaint alleges just such a fraud on the part of third-party defendants. Thus allowing contribution in the present matter is entirely consistent with Greene and Stratton. To require, as third-party defendants urge, a definition of ‘joint tortfeasor’ that is narrow enough to eliminate Phoenix Leasing would be virtually to eviscerate the right of contribution under Section 10(b). Accordingly, the Court denies the instant motion to dismiss third-party plaintiffs contribution claim under Section 10(b).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Leslie Fay Companies, Inc. Securities Litigation