In re Platinum & Palladium Commodities Litigation’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district ·

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

1. “(1) that the [defendant] had the ability to influence market prices; (2) that [he] specifically intended to do so; (3) that artificial prices existed; and (4) that the [defendant] caused the artificial prices.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Libor-Based Fin. Instruments Antitrust Litig. · In re Term Commodities Cotton Futures Litigation

2. “In order to recover damages from a secondary party in an action for 'aiding and abetting' liability under the Commodities Exchange Act, a plaintiff must first prove that a primary party committed a commodities violation.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Libor-Based Fin. Instruments Antitrust Litig.

3. “[a]l-though the CFTC Order included certain factual findings, it nevertheless was the product of a settlement between the CFTC and the Respondents, not an adjudication of the underlying issues in the CFTC proceeding.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 1 F. Supp. 3d 6 - Mazuma Holding Corp. v. Bethke