Hocking v. Dubois’s Empirical Analysis
839 F.2d 560 · 1988
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently February 2013
10 federal appellate · 2 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. § 77B (§ 2 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78C (§ 3 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Securities & Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co. · United Housing Foundation, Inc. v. Forman · Tcherepnin v. Knight · Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Curran · Securities & Exchange Commission v. C. M. Joiner Leasing Corp.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We review the grant of summary judgment de novo. SEC v. Belmont Reid & Co., 794 F.2d 1388 , 1390 (9th Cir.1986). Our task is identical to the trial court’s: while viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to Hocking, we must determine whether the defendants have shown that there are no disputed issues of material fact and that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Alaska v. United States, 754 F.2d 851 , 853 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 968 , 106 S.Ct. 333 , 88 L.Ed.2d 317 (1985). We also review de novo the district court’s determination whether a transaction is a security. Belmont Reid & Co., 794 F.2d at 1390 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hocking v. Dubois“1.The condominiums, with any rental arrangement or other similar service, are offered and sold with emphasis on the economic benefits to the purchaser to be derived from the managerial efforts of the promoter, or a third party designated or arranged for by the promoter, from rental of the units. 2. The offering of participation in a rental pool arrangement; and 3. The offering of a rental or similar arrangement whereby the purchaser must hold his unit available for rental for any part of the year, must use an exclusive rental agent or is otherwise materially restricted in his occupancy or rental of his unit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Hocking v. Dubois
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.