Petri v. Gatlin’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently January 2013 · most notably 216 Ill. 2d 100 - Avery v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance (2005), Greenberger v. GEICO General Insurance (2011)
1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1341 (White-Collar Crime Penalty Enhancement Act of 2002) · 18 U.S.C. § 1961 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act)
Relies on Hishon v. King & Spalding · 174 Ill. 2d 482 - Connick v. Suzuki Motor Co., Ltd. · DiLeo v. Ernst & Young · United States v. Berkowitz · Doe v. Boys Clubs of Greater Dallas, 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The plaintiffs have alleged all of the details they reasonably could have been expected to allege — that the defendants distributed brochures containing misinformation to potential customers and that the plaintiffs received copies of the brochure prior to the time they entered into their contractual agreements with the defendants. The plaintiffs have attached a copy of the brochure to the complaint and have specifically identified the statements in the brochures that are allegedly misleading. At this junction, the plaintiffs cannot be expected to know which individuals ... drafted the brochures.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The plaintiffs’ fraud allegations are neither cryptic nor confusing. The plaintiffs have specified the alleged misrepresentations and have attached a copy of the document in which the alleged misrepresentations appear. Aside from the [corporation], only three individuals are named as defendants. The complaint is sufficiently particular to inform the defendants of the nature of the claims against them, and those defendants are entirely capable of drafting an adequate response.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the circumstances must be pleaded in detail. This means the who, what, when, where, and how: the first paragraph of any newspaper story.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Daniels v. Bursey
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.