In re Saic Inc. Derivative Litigation’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate ·

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

1. “Plaintiffs’ interpretation of the [c]om-plaint attempts to collapse the choice between Aronson (designed for board action) and Rales (designed for board inaction) into the question whether a[b]oard majority is interested because it faces a substantial likelihood of liability due to its conscious decision to remain inactive.... Plaintiffs’ proposed inquiry focuses on whether the [bjoard’s apparent inaction should be treated as a form of board action.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 553 F. App'x 54 - Welch Ex Rel. SAIC v. Havenstein

2. “`In contrast to a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), a Rule 23.1 motion to dismiss for failure to make a demand is not intended to test the legal sufficiency of the plaintiff~' substantive claim. Rather, its purpose is to determine who is entitled, as between the corporation and its shareholders, to assert the plaintiffs underlying substantive claim on the corporation's behalf.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Canty v. Day

3. “state with particularity: (A) any effort by the plaintiff to obtain the desired action from the directors or comparable authority and, if necessary, from the shareholders or . members; and (B) the reasons for not obtaining the action or not making the effort.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Gould ex rel. Bank of America v. Moynihan