974 F. Supp. 2d 1135 - Freed v. Weiss’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1441
Relies on Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v. Mercury Construction Corp. · Colorado River Water Conservation District v. United States · Burford v. Sun Oil Co. · 159 Ill. 2d 137 - Congregation of the Passion v. Touche Ross & Co. · Lumen Construction, Inc. v. Brant Construction Co.
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Ronald Weiss is a defendant only in the federal suit. But Freed’s claim against Ronald Weiss is derivative of his claim against Weiss, in that Freed claims that Ronald Weiss breached duties owed to Freed when Weiss received the help of his father Ronald Weiss, the LLC’s accountant, to create false accounting records that concealed Weiss’s theft from Freed. If Weiss is not liable for any theft or other misconduct, then Ronald Weiss could hardly be liable for having helped Weiss to cover up that alleged misconduct.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Freed v. Friedman
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.