Ellington v. Giacoumakis’s Empirical Analysis
2013
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 7201 (§ 2 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) · 15 U.S.C. § 78u-6 · 18 U.S.C. § 1514A (§ 806 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Pérez-Acevedo v. Rivero-Cubano · Rg Financial Corp v. Vergara-Nuez · Asadi v. G.E. Energy (USA), L.L.C.
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“any officer, employee, subcontractor, or agent ... discharge^], ... threatens], [or] harass [es], ... an employee in the terms and conditions of employment because of any lawful act done by the employee— (1) to provide information, cause information to be provided, or otherwise assist in an investigation regarding any conduct which the employee reasonably believes constitutes a violation of any rule or regulation of the Securities and Exchange Commission, or any provision of Federal law relating to fraud against shareholders, when the information or assistance is provided to or the investigation is conducted by— (A) a Federal regulatory or law enforcement agency; (B) any Member of Congress or any committee of Congress; or (C) a person with supervisory authority over the employee (or such other person working for the employer who has the authority to investigate, discover, or terminate misconduct) .... 48”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) For purposes of the anti-retaliation protections afforded by Section 21F(h)(l) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78u-6(h)(l)), you are a whistle-blower if: (i) You possess a reasonable belief that the information you are providing relates to a possible securities law violation (or, where applicable, to a possible violation of the provisions set forth in 18 U.S.C. 1514A(a)) that has occurred, is ongoing, or is about to occur, and; (ii) You provide that information in a manner described in Section 21F(h)(l)(A) of the Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78u-6(h)(l)(A)). (iii) The anti-retaliation protections apply whether or not you satisfy the requirements, procedures and conditions to qualify for an award.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]his court respectfully disagrees and instead adopts the SEC's interpretation of the relevant provisions of Dodd-Frank.” . See Virgilio v. City of New York, 407 F.3d 105, 112 (2d Cir.2005) (quoting Robinson v. Shell Oil Co., 519 U.S. 337, 341 , 117 S.Ct. 843, 136 L.Ed.2d 808 (1997)) (”
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.