Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc. v. Wagoner’s Empirical Analysis
944 F.2d 114 · 1991
Citation profile
54 federal appellate · 20 district · 28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 324 later decisions — most recently May 2021 · most notably Hirsch v. Arthur Andersen & Co. (1995), Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. R.F. Lafferty & Co. (2001)
54 federal appellate · 20 district · 28 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from New York Southern District Court)
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 541
Relies on Warth v. Seldin · Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Baker v. Carr · Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc. · At&T Technologies, Inc. v. Communications Workers
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 324 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he “case or controversy” requirement coincides with the scope of the powers the Bankruptcy Code gives a trustee, that is, if a trustee has no power to assert a claim because it is not one belonging to the bankrupt estate, then he also fails to meet the prudential limitation that the legal rights asserted must be his own.”
19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a] claim against a third party for defrauding a corporation with the cooperation of management accrues to creditors, not to the guilty corporation.”
10 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"Although Conticommodity involved a one year time limitation set forth in the arbitration agreement itself, we stated emphatically that any limitations defense — whether stemming from the arbitration agreement, arbitration association rule or state statute — is an issue to be addressed by the arbitrators."”
6 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.