Hawes v. C. E. Cook & Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 77Q (§ 17 of the Securities Act of 1933) · 15 U.S.C. § 78A (§ 1 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78J (§ 10 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934) · 15 U.S.C. § 78T (§ 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
Relies on Bell v. Hood · Pepper v. Litton · Hormel v. Helvering · J. I. Case Co. v. Borak · Superintendent of Insurance of State of New York v. Bankers Life and Casualty Company
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Plainly, the scope of discovery is broad, but not unlimited. The basic positive touchstone is relevance, including the reasonable possibility that the information sought would lead to admissible evidence. One fundamental limit is privilege. “Thus, the issue is whether the matters sought to be discovered are relevant to the subject matter of this suit.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Reeg v. Fetzer
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.