In re Libor-Based Financial Instruments Antitrust Litigation’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 7 U.S.C. § 25
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Erickson v. Pardus · Brunswick Corporation v. Pueblo Bowl-O-Mat Inc · Dura Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Broudo · Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc.
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a covenant of good faith and fair dealing in the course of contract performance”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“). DI 134 at 11-13 (citing, among other authorities, In re LIBOR-Based Fin. Instruments Antitrust Litig. (”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““[Ajlthough the swap contracts clearly required defendants to pay plaintiffs the prescribed floating rate of return using the LIBOR reported by the BBA, the contracts did not ‘clearly cover[]’ the subject matter now at issue, namely whether defendants were permitted to manipulate LIBOR itself and thereby depress the amount they were required to pay plaintiffs.””
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.