Garcia v. Cordova’s Empirical Analysis
930 F.2d 826 · 1991
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 10 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Murphy v. Sofamor Danek Group, Inc. (1997), A. Carl Helwig, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated (2001)
8 federal appellate · 10 district · 4 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. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Basic Inc. v. Levinson · TSC Industries, Inc. v. Northway, Inc. · Affiliated Ute Citizens of Utah v. United States · Chiarella v. United States · Foy v. Northeast Suburban Life
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The issue of materiality may be characterized as a mixed question of law and fact, involving as it does the application of a legal standard to a particular set of facts. In considering whether summary judgment on the issue is appropriate, we must bear in mind that the underlying objective facts, which will often be free from dispute, are merely the starting point for the ultimate determination of materiality. The determination requires delicate assessments of the inferences a “reasonable shareholder” would draw from a given set of facts and the significance of those inferences to him, and these assessments are peculiarly ones for the trier of fact. Only if the established omissions are “so obviously important to an investor, that reasonable minds cannot differ on the question of materiality” is the ultimate issue of materiality appropriately resolved “as a matter of law” by summary judgment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“It shall be unlawful for any person ... (b) To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading ...”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“is typically historical information or other factual information that is objectively verifiable....”
2 later decisions 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.