Pryor v. United States Steel Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
794 F.2d 52 · 1986
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 78N (§ 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78Q (§ 17 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Cort v. Ash · Cannon v. University of Chicago · Touche Ross & Co. v. Redington · Transamerica Mortgage Advisors, Inc. v. Lewis · Santa Fe Industries, Inc. v. Green
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“surely [one of] the primary intended beneficiaries of [the statute], since 'the sole purpose of the Williams Act was the protection of investors who are confronted with a tender offer.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Field v. Trump“the injury is easy to calculate, the victims are easy to locate, and the likelihood of litigation by such victims is high if a private right of action exists.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Field v. Trump“unlike the bulk of federal securities regulation, confers a substantive right on [its] beneficiaries,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Field v. Trump
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.