Wiesenberger v. W. E. Hutton & Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1964
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently April 2012 · most notably 2 Cal. 3d 415 - In Re Lifschutz (1970), Premium Service Corporation v. The Sperry & Hutchinson Company, George A. Scott (1975)
4 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 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. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 80B · 15 U.S.C. § 80B · 26 U.S.C. § 7213 · 28 U.S.C. § 1331
Relies on Kingsley v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad · Rozanski v. Midland S. S. Line · United Motion Theatre Company, a Copartnership, Richard Sloan, and Eugene Sloan v. Thomas H. Ealand, Doing Business as Ferndale Theatre
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There is no privilege for income tax returns....”
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.