Securities & Exchange Commission v. United States Realty & Improvement Co.’s Empirical Analysis
310 U.S. 434 · 1940
Citation profile
453 federal appellate · 83 district · 47 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 1,287 later decisions (68 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2021 · most notably Burford v. Sun Oil Co. (1943), United States v. American Trucking Associations (1940)
453 federal appellate · 83 district · 47 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedSecurities & Exchange Commission v. United States Realty & Improvement Co. (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Pepper v. Litton · Virginian Ry Co v. System Federation No 40 · Case v. Los Angeles Lumber Products Co. · Continental Illinois Nat Bank Trust Co of Chicago v. Chicago R I & P Ry Co
Cited together with Pepper v. Litton · General Stores Corp. v. Shlensky · Case v. Los Angeles Lumber Products Co. · Securities & Exchange Commission v. American Trailer Rentals Co. · American United Mut Life Ins Co v. City of Avon Park Fla
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 1,287 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“plainly dispenses with any requirement that the intervenor shall have a direct personal or pecuniary interest in the subject of the litigation.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A bankruptcy court is a court of equity, § 2, 11 U.S.C. § 11, and is guided by equitable doctrines and principles except in so far as they are inconsistent with the Act.... A court of equity may in its discretion in the exercise of the jurisdiction committed to it grant or deny relief upon performance of a condition which will safeguard the public interest.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Upon timely application anyone may be permitted to intervene in an action: * * * (2) when an applicant’s claim or defense and the main action have a question of law or fact in common. When a party to an action relies for [a] ground of claim or defense upon any statute or executive order administered by a federal or state governmental officer or agency or upon any regulation, order, requirement, or agreement issued or made pursuant to the statute or executive order, the officer or agency upon timely application may be permitted to intervene in the action. In exercising its discretion the trial court shall consider whether the intervention will unduly delay or prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original parties.” [Emphasis added.]”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Diamond v. Charles · In re Estelle
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.