Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 784 F.2d 1385 - Mosher v. Kane

Mosher v. Kane’s Empirical Analysis

784 F.2d 1385 · 1986

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
November 2004
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 8 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently November 2004 · most notably Maldonado v. Dominguez (1998), Lou v. Belzberg (1987)

19 federal appellate · 8 district ·

310198619902000decided

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. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78N (§ 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 26 U.S.C. § 401 (Self-Employed Individuals Tax Retirement Act of 1962) · 28 U.S.C. § 1291

Relies on Conley v. Gibson · Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co. · Hannahville Indian Community 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a defendant is engaged in a scheme for the purpose of forcing the plaintiffs to convert their shares for money or other considerations,”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[t]here was a contractual relationship between the parties, and the transaction was allegedly aborted as a result”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “contractual relationship elevated appellants to the status of statutory purchasers”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.