Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 896 F.2d 975 - Evans v. Dale

Evans v. Dale’s Empirical Analysis

896 F.2d 975 · 1990

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
April 2010
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently April 2010

5 federal appellate · 2 district ·

100199020002010decided

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. § 78A (§ 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1738

Relies on Migra v. Warren City School District Board of Education · Burford v. Sun Oil Co. · New Orleans Public Service, Inc. v. Council of City of New Orleans · McNeese v. Board of Education for Community Unit School District 187 Cahokia · Tafflin v. Levitt

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

  1. “By deciding the federal securities fraud issues asserted here, the district court will not usurp any part of Texas domestic relations law. It is true that the outcome of the exclusively federal issue may affect the relative value of property distributions which will be made by the Texas court and may even require a redistribution of that property. However, the decision regarding distribution or redistribution under Texas domestic relations law will remain entirely within the authority of the Texas court. If the district court orders disgorgement of the profits made by Dale in stock transactions subsequent to the divorce or takes other remedial action allowed by the federal securities laws, it will do so under its exclusive jurisdiction vested pursuant to those laws.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.