Deviries v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
805 F.2d 326 · 1986
Citation profile
36 federal appellate · 15 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently April 2010 · most notably Parnes, Schlifke v. Seafirst Corp. (1989)
36 federal appellate · 15 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 78O (§ 15 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78T (§ 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 18 U.S.C. § 1962 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on Sedima Sprl v. Imrex Company Inc · Local 408, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Board · Ratchford v. Gay Lib · White v. United States · Licensed Beverage Distributors Ass'n v. United States
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Absent allegations sufficient to establish a true 'pattern' of related but distinct schemes of fraud, [plaintiffs'] complaint fails to meet one of the required elements of a civil RICO claim.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Only the court en banc is empowered to change an existing rule of law.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Putting to one side the sufficiency of his allegations of a RICO “enterprise” and assuming arguendo that he could establish several related acts of fraud, we hold that Deviries still has failed to allege the continuity necessary to establish a pattern of racketeering activity____ If proven, defendants’ actions at worst would comprise one scheme to generate excessive sales commissions by recommending unsuitable investments and churning Deviries’s account. This is insufficient to state a RICO claim____ Absent allegations sufficient to establish a true “pattern” of related but distinct schemes of fraud, Deviries’s complaint fails to meet one of the required elements of a civil RICO claim.”
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.