Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 467 U.S. 735 - Securities & Exchange Commission v. Jerry T. O'Brien, Inc.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Jerry T. O'Brien, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

389
cited by 389 later decisions
3
cited 3 times by the Supreme Court
18
states following
September 2024
most recently cited

108 federal appellate · 40 district · 76 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 389 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently September 2024 · most notably Carpenter v. United States (2018), Ned L. Siegel, Georgette Sosa Douglas v. Theresa Lepore, Charles E. Burton (2000)

108 federal appellate · 40 district · 76 state decisions — followed in 18 states

119019841990200020102020decided

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

reviewedthe decision below (from Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 12 U.S.C. § 3401 (Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978) · 15 U.S.C. § 77S (§ 19 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77U (§ 21 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 77V (§ 22 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78U (§ 21 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 80A · 15 U.S.C. § 80B

Relies on Cort v. Ash · Cannon v. University of Chicago · Fisher v. United States · United States v. Powell · Donaldson v. United States

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 389 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he most salient feature of the Act is the narrow scope of the entitlement it creates.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the Due Process Clause ... is [not] offended when a federal administrative agency, without notifying a person under investigation, uses its subpoena power to gather evidence adverse to him. The Due Process Clause is not implicated under such circumstances because an administrative investigation adjudicates no legal rights....”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “when a person communicates information to a third party ..., he cannot object if the third party conveys that information or records thereof to law enforcement authorities”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.