Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 843 F.2d 618 - Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,705, 25 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 658 Willco Kuwait (Trading) S.A.K. v. Peter J. Desavary, Willco Kuwait (Trading) S.A.K. v. Peter J. Desavary

Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 93,705, 25 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 658 Willco Kuwait (Trading) S.A.K. v. Peter J. Desavary, Willco Kuwait (Trading) S.A.K. v. Peter J. Desavary’s Empirical Analysis

843 F.2d 618 · 1988

Citation profile

47
cited by 47 later decisions
1
states following
June 2025
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably Alexis v. McDonald's Restaurants of Massachusetts, Inc. (1995), Kassel v. Gannett Co. (1989)

27 federal appellate · 9 district · 1 state decisions

17019881990200020102020decided

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. § 77K (§ 11 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)

Relies on Hamling v. United States · Palmer v. Hoffman · Time, Inc. v. Bon Air Hotel, Inc. · Brady v. United States · United States v. Security Industrial Bank

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

  1. “error may not be predicated upon a ruling which admits or excludes evidence unless a substantial right of the party is affected, and . . . [i]n case the ruling is one admitting evidence, a timely objection or motion to strike appears of record.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “there can be no claim of misrepresentation or material omission relative to the price information.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. Jensen

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.