Schwebel v. Orrick’s Empirical Analysis
1957
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently May 2017
6 federal appellate · 1 district · 5 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 15 U.S.C. § 77H (§ 8 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78S (§ 19 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78W (§ 23 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 5 U.S.C. § 1001 · 5 U.S.C. § 1004 · 5 U.S.C. § 1008
Relies on Myers v. Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. · Eccles v. Peoples Bank of Lakewood Village · Goldsmith v. United States Board of Tax Appeals · Allen v. Grand Central Aircraft Co. · Dragna v. California
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In the exercise of its jurisdiction to determine the legal question of the authority of the administrative body to maintain the threatened action, the court holds that the Securities and Exchange Commission has implied authority under its general statutory power to make rules and regulations necessary for the execution of its functions to establish qualifications for attorneys practicing before it and to take disciplinary action against attorneys found guilty of unethical or improper professional conduct and that the Commission has adequately implemented this authority by its [rules]. It is not essential that a roster of the bar be maintained, but is sufficient that the Commission has prescribed by regulation the qualifications for admission to practice before it.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Except in cases of willfulness or those in which public health, interest or safety requires otherwise, no withdrawal, suspension, revocation, or annulment of any license shall be lawful unless, prior to the institution of agency proceedings therefor, facts or conduct which may warrant such action shall have been called to the attention of the licensee by the agency in writing and the licensee shall have been accorded opportunity to demonstrate or achieve compliance with all lawful requirements.”
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.