890 F. Supp. 2d 650 - In re Computer Sciences Corp. Securities Litigation’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 77Z (§ 26 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21d of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21e of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Ernst & Ernst v. Hochfelder · Tellabs, Inc. v. Makor Issues & Rights, Ltd. · Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Inc. v. Dabit
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[P]recedent points persuasively to the conclusion that in order for a corporation to be liable for securities fraud, 'at least one corporate agent' must have 'acted with the required state of mind[.]' i.e. , made a false or misleading statement of material fact with scienter.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“corporate liability for securities fraud depends on at least one of [a corporation's] agents making a false or misleading statement with scienter.”
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.