Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 821 F.2d 581 - Finn v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.

Finn v. Prudential-Bache Securities, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

821 F.2d 581 · 1987

Citation profile

51
cited by 51 later decisions
2
states following
April 2016
most recently cited

21 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently April 2016 · most notably Street v. Jc Bradford & Company (1989), Grayson v. K Mart Corp. (1996)

21 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions

1701987199020002010decided

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. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)

Relies on Bonner v. City of Prichard · Bankers Trust Co. v. Mallis · Stein v. Reynolds Securities, Inc. · Jetco Electronic Industries, Inc. v. Gardiner · Mercantile Bank & Trust Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co.

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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The Finns assert that Bache illegally manipulated their account to the point where the Finns owed over $500,000.00 and that because of that indebtedness, coupled with the Finns' lack of any other meaningful assets, they had no choice but to sign the release in order to have an outside chance of recouping their losses. We find that these allegations raise triable issues of fact as to the claim of duress.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “1)the defendant made a false representation of past or present fact, 2)the defendant knew the statement was false, 3)the statement was made for the purpose of inducing the plaintiff to rely on it, and 4)the plaintiff's reliance was reasonable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “there is a fiduciary relationship between the parties or the facts are solely within the knowledge of the representor or some trick had been employed to prevent an independent investigation by the rep-resentee.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.