Blue Sky L. Rep. P 72,945, Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,134, 9 Ucc rep.serv.2d 158 Robert M. Schneberger v. W. Randolph Wheeler, United States Trust Company of New York, a New York Corporation, United States Trust Company of New York, a New York Corporation, Plaintiff-Counterclaim-Plaintiff-Appellant v. Warren J. Plotner, Defendant- Counterclaim-Plaintiff v. Randolph Wheeler, Andrew A. Levy, and Buckeye Petroleum Co., Counterclaim-Defendants’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2012
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 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
Relies on Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co. · Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 95,351 Billie Jean Woodward v. Metro Bank of Dallas · Barnes v. Southwest Forest Industries, Inc. · Woods v. Barnett Bank · Brown v. City of Clewiston
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In a case combining silence/inaction with affirmative assistance, the degree of knowledge required should depend on how ordinary the assisting activity is in the business involved. If the evidence shows no more than transactions constituting the daily grist of the mill, we would be loathe to find 10b-5 liability without clear proof of intent to violate the securities laws. Conversely, if the method or transaction is atypical or lacks business justification, it may be possible to infer the knowledge necessary for aiding and abetting liability.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“‘[A] person may be held as an aider and abettor only if some other party has committed a securities law violation, if the accused party has general awareness that his role was part of an overall activity that is improper, and if the accused aider-abettor knowingly and substantially assisted the violation.””
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.