green
Positive treatment
1.3 score
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sampson v. Invest America, Inc.
(2×)
Compare Milnarik v. M-S Commodities, Inc., 457 F.2d 274 (7th Cir.1972) and Curran v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith, Inc., 622 F.2d 216 , 222 n. 5 (6th Cir.1980) (cases collected), affd on other grounds, 453 U.S. 925 , 102 S.Ct. 884 , 69 L.Ed.2d 1020 (1982) (espousing a “horizontal commonality” or a pooling of investors’ interests) with Securities and Exchange Commission v. Koscot Interplanetary, Inc., 497 F.2d 473 (5th Cir.1974) (applying the “broad vertical” test which merely requires a link between the investor’s fortunes and the promoter’s efforts).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kaufman v. Magid
(2×)
See, e.g., Curran v. Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, Fenner and Smith, Inc., 622 F.2d 216, 222-25 (6th Cir. 1980), aff’d (on unrelated issue), 453 U.S. 925 , 102 S.Ct. 884 , 69 L.Ed.2d 1020 (1982); Hirk v. Agri-Re *1097 search Council, Inc., 561 F.2d 96 (7th Cir. 1977); Wasnowic v. Chicago Board of Trade, 352 F.Supp. Í066, 1068-69 (M.D.Pa.1972), aff’d without opinion, 491 F.2d 752 (3rd Cir. 1973), cert. denied, 416 U.S. 994 , 94 S.Ct. 2407 , 40 L.Ed.2d 773 (1974).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc.
v.
Curran
v.
Curran
No. 80-203.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Aug 28, 1981.
Published
C. A. 6th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 451 U. S. 906.] Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.