green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 3×
7.8 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1981 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1981
2003
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 45 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Fidelity Funding of California v. Reinhold
other than where there is specific evidence of agency bad faith or malicious governmental tactics, the strongest case for deferring civil proceedings is where a party under indictment for a serious offense is required to defend a civil or administrative action involving the same …
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
United States v. Medic House, Inc.
in the absence of substantial prejudice to the rights of the parties involved, such parallel proceedings are unobjectionable under our jurisprudence.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Drexel Burnham Lambert Inc.
a court may decide in its discretion to stay civil proceedings, postpone civil discovery, or impose protective orders and conditions ...
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Slagowski v. Central Washington Asphalt
Corp. v. Molinaro, 889 F.2d 899, 902 (9th Cir.1989); Securities & Exchange Comm’n v. Dresser Indus., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1375 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980),” the court “may decide in its discretion to stay civil proceedings ... ‘when the interests of justice seem [] to require such action.’ ” Id. at 324 (internal citations omitted).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Durham v. United States Department of Justice
Rule 6(e) prohibits the disclosure of grand jury records which would “tend to reveal some secret aspect of the grand jury’s investigation!;] such matters as ‘the identities of witnesses or jurors, the substance of testimony, the strategy or direction of the investigation, the deliberations or questions of jurors, and the like.’ ” Senate of Puerto Rico v. United States Department of Justice, 823 F.2d 574, 582 (D.C.Cir.1987) (quoting SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1382 (D.C.Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 5.Ct. 529, 66 L.Ed.2d 289 ); see Fund for Constitut…
discussed
Cited "see"
in Re: Thomas Lytle and Ellen Lytle
See SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc. , 628 F.2d On January 22, 2009, Novoa and Banera filed this motion 1368, 1376 (D.C.Cir.1980) (en bane), cert. denied, 449 requesting that the Court stay the civil proceedings in this U.S . 993, I 01 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); see also case pending completion of the ongoing state criminal Trustees of Plumbers and Pipejitters Nat '/ Pension Fund action against Novoa.
discussed
Cited "see"
Alcala v. Texas Webb County
See SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1376 (D.C.Cir.1980) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); see also Trustees of Plumbers and Pipefitters Nat’l Pension Fund v. Transworld Mech., Inc., 886 F.Supp. 1134, 1138 (S.D.N.Y.1995); see also Heller Healthcare Fin., Inc. v. Boyes, 2002 WL 1558337 , at *3 (N.D.Tex.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States Ex Rel. Gonzalez v. Fresenius Medical Care North America
See SEC v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1376 (D.C.Cir.1980) (explaining how the privilege against self-incrimination is implicated in parallel civil and criminal proceedings), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
cited
Cited "see"
Emerson Electric Supply Co. v. Estes Express Lines Corp.
See Howe v. Allied Van Lines, Inc., 622 F.2d 1147, 1156-57 (3d Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 992 , 101 S.Ct. 528 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
cited
Cited "see"
Maydak v. U.S. Department of Justice
See id. pages 92-129, 135-140, 145-152, 156-159, 187, 193-194.
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Blackwell
Rule 6(e) applies “not only to information drawn from transcripts of grand jury proceedings, but also to anything which may reveal what occurred before the grand jury.” In re Grand Jury Matter, 682 F.2d 61, 63 (3d Cir.1982); see Fund for Constitutional Gov’t v. National Archives & Records Serv., 656 F.2d 856, 869 (D.C.Cir.1981) (scope of grand jury secrecy encompasses anything which would reveal “the identities of witnesses or jurors, the substance of the testimony, the strategy or direction of the investigation, the deliberations or question of the jurors, and the like”) (quoting SE…
discussed
Cited "see"
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Incendy
See S.E.C. v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 (D.C.Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980) (trial courts have discretion to stay civil proceedings because of parallel criminal proceeding).
cited
Cited "see"
United Technologies Corp. v. Dean
See SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1375 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); Brock v. Tolkow, 109 F.R.D. 116, 119 (E.D.N.Y.1985).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Giampa
This general rule of grand jury secrecy is codified in Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. 46 Rule 6(e) applies “not only to information drawn from transcripts of grand jury proceedings, but also to anything which may reveal what occurred before the grand jury.” In re Grand Jury Matter, 682 F.2d 61, 63 (3d Cir.1982); see Fund for Constitutional Gov’t v. National Archives & Records Serv., 656 F.2d 856, 869 (D.C.Cir.1981) (scope of grand jury secrecy encompasses anything which would reveal “the identities of witnesses or jurors, the substance of testimony, the strategy …
discussed
Cited "see"
McDonnell v. United States
See Fund for Constitutional Gov’t, 656 F.2d at 869 (names and identities of witnesses, substance of testimony, and documents considered by grand jury fall within broad reach of grand jury secrecy) (citing SEC v. Dresser Indus. 628 F.2d 1368 , 1382 (en banc cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980)).
cited
Cited "see"
Manna v. United States Department of Justice
See SEC v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 (D.C.Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Twenty First Century Corp. v. LaBianca
See Securities Exchange Commission v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368, 1376 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980) (If “[t]he noncriminal proceeding ... might undermine the party’s Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, expand rights of criminal discovery beyond the limits of Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 16(b) ... [and] delay of the noncriminal proceeding would not seriously injure the public interest, a court may be justified in deferring it.”).
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Eisenberg
Rule 6(e) applies “not only to information drawn from transcripts of grand jury proceedings, but also to anything which may reveal what occurred before the grand jury.” In re Grand Jury Matter, 682 F.2d 61, 63 (3d Cir.1982); see Fund for Constitutional Gov’t v. National Archives & Records Serv., 656 F.2d 856, 869 (D.C.Cir.1981) (scope of grand jury secrecy encompasses anything which would reveal “the identities of witnesses or jurors, the substance of testimony, the strategy or direction of the investigation, the deliberations or questions of the jurors, and the like.”) (quoting SEC …
cited
Cited "see"
In re Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. Securities Litigation
See S.E.C. v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1376 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Search Warrant for Northwest Enviroservices, Inc.
See Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dresser Industries, 628 F.2d 1368, 1382 (D.C.Cir.) cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980) where the Court stated that while disclosure of matters occurring before the grand jury are prohibited, this does not require “that a veil of secrecy be drawn over all matters occurring in the world that happen to be investigated by a Grand Jury.” Moreover, even if the information is or may later be presented to a grand jury, it is not transformed into grand jury material.
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Aero Mayflower Transit Co.
See, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 (D.C.Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 943 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. Harker
Accord, S.E.C. v. Dresser Industries, 628 F.2d 1368 , 1388 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); United States v. Exxon Corp., 628 F.2d 70 , 77 n. 7 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 446 U.S. 964 , 100 S.Ct. 2940 , 64 L.Ed.2d 823 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mid-America's Process Service and Lynn Whitefield v. Honorable James O. Ellison, Terry Rhine v. Honorable James O. Ellison
See SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1375-76 (D.C.Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); Gordon v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., 427 F.2d 578, 580 (D.C.Cir.1970).
discussed
Cited "see"
Cook v. Boorstin
See SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1390 (D.C.Cir.) ("[T]he burden of proof rests on those resisting intervention."), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); Central States, S.E. & S.W.
discussed
Cited "see"
Cook ex rel. Black Employees of the Library of Congress v. Boorstin
See SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1390 (D.C.Cir.) (“[T]he burden of proof rests on those resisting intervention.”), cer t. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); Central States, S.E. & S.W.
discussed
Cited "see"
Ferguson v. State
See Shriner v. State, 386 So.2d 525 (Fla. 1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1103 , 101 S.Ct. 899 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1981); Dobbert v. State, 375 So.2d 1069 (Fla. 1979), cert. denied, 447 U.S. 912 , 101 S.Ct. 3000 , 64 L.Ed.2d 862 (1980); Hargrave v. State, 366 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1978), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 919 , 100 S.Ct. 239 , 62 L.Ed.2d 176 (1979); and Elledge v. State, 346 So.2d 998 (Fla. 1977).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Securities & Exchange Commission v. Doody
See, e.g., SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1375 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); Downe, 1993 WL 22126 , at *12-13. 3 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Ronald P. Markwood
The Court held that, under the facts, this claim did not amount to an extraordinary circumstance requiring discovery. 647 F.2d at 193-94 ; see also United States v. Aero Mayflower Transit Co., Inc., 831 F.2d 1142, 1146 (D.C.Cir.1987) (reasoning that “ ‘discovery may be available in some subpoena enforcement proceedings where the circumstances indicate that further information is necessary for the courts to discharge their duty.’ ”) (quoting SEC v. Dresser Indus., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1388 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980)).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Church of Scientology of Texas v. Internal Revenue Service
Automatically sealing all that a grand jury sees or hears would enable the government to shield any information from public view indefinitely by the simple expedient of presenting it to the grand jury. (footnotes and citations omitted) (emphasis in original); See also, Fund for Constitutional Government 656 F.2d at 869 , (quoting, SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 202 U.S.App.D.C. 345, 359 , 628 F.2d 1368 , 1382 (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).) (The “scope of the secrecy is necessarily broad,” encompassing testimony before the grand jury and �…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Nowaczyk v. Matingas
See also S.E.C. v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1376 (D.C.Cir.1980) (where no indictment has issued, the purpose of staying civil proceedings during pending criminal proceedings is “a far weaker one”) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980). 4.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Federal Trade Commission v. Invention Submission Corporation
The moving party must make an “adequate showing that the agency is acting in bad faith or for an improper purpose, such as harassment.” Aero Mayflower, 831 F.2d at 1145 ; see also SEC v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1388 (D.C.Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Cannistraro
“Rule 6(e) applies not only to information drawn from transcripts of grand jury proceedings, but also to anything which may reveal what occurred before the grand jury.” In re Grand Jury Matter, 682 F.2d *50 61, 63 (3d Cir.1982); see also Fund for Constitutional Gov’t v. National Archives & Records Serv., 656 F.2d 856, 869 (D.C.Cir.1981) (The scope of grand jury secrecy encompasses anything “which would reveal ‘the identities of witnesses or jurors, the substance of testimony, the strategy or direction of the investigation, the. deliberations or questions of the jurors, and the like.�…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Stenger v. Lehigh Valley Hospital Center
(2×)
See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Hayes, [ 489 Pa. 419 , 414 A.2d 318 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 992 , 101 S.Ct. 528 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980) ].
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Independent Petrochemical Corp. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
Cir.1977); see also Securities and Exchange Comm’n v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368, 1390 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Hearne v. United States
See also Securities and Exchange Commission v. Dresser Industries, 202 U.S.App.D.C. 345, 351-353 , 628 F.2d 1368, 1374-1376 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hooker Chemicals & Plastics Corp.
See also SEC v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1390 (D.C.Cir.) (corporate officer should have been allowed to intervene in SEC action against corporation, but with hindsight it is clear his interests were adequately represented), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980). .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
United States v. Hooker Chemicals & Plastics Corp.
See also SEC v. Dresser Indus., Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1390 (D.C.Cir.) (corporate officer should have been allowed to intervene in SEC action against corporation, but with hindsight it is clear his interests were adequately represented), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980) 15 The Supreme Court had previously dealt with intervention in a government enforcement action in Cascade Natural Gas Corp. v. El Paso Natural Gas Co., 386 U.S. 129 , 87 S.Ct. 932 , 17 L.Ed.2d 814 (1967), which related both to the unamended and the amended Rule 24.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Capital Cities Media, Inc. v. Toole
See, e.g., Commonwealth v. Hayes, 489 Pa. 419 , 414 A.2d 318 , cert. denied, 449 U.S. 992 , 101 S.Ct. 528 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980) (Opinion of Nix, J.); Commonwealth v. Buehl, 316 Pa.Super. 215 , 462 A.2d 1316 (1983) ; Petition of Daily Item, 310 Pa.Super. 222 , 456 A.2d 580 (1983); see also United States v. Criden, 675 F.2d 550 (3d Cir.1982).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Interstate Commerce Commission and United States of America, Burlington Northern Inc. v. United States of America and Interstate Commerce Commission
See also Howe v. Allied Van Lines, Inc., 622 F.2d 1147, 1149, 1151-1156 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 992 , 101 S.Ct. 528 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980) 7 See U. S. Dep't of Energy v. B & O R.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Interstate Commerce Commission
See also Howe v. Allied Van Lines, Inc., 622 F.2d 1147, 1149, 1151-1156 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 992 , 101 S.Ct. 528 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980). .
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Teresa G. Hoover v. Dewey W. Knight, Jr., Individually, and as Interim County Manager of Dade County, Florida
See also, S.E.C. v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 (D.C.Cir.1980) (en banc), cert. den. 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Grand Jury Matter. Appeal of Nicholas Catania
See also, SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1382 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Fund for Constitutional Government v. National Archives and Records Service
See also SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 202 U.S.App.D.C. 345, 359 , 628 F.2d 1368 , 1382 (en banc), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 993 , 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Securities and Exchange Commission v. Esm Government Securities, Inc.
See, e. g., SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1379-80 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); SEC v. Blackfoot Bituminous, Inc., 622 F.2d 512 , 515 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 101 S.Ct. 362 , 66 L.Ed.2d 220 (1980).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Securities & Exchange Commission v. ESM Government Securities, Inc.
See, e. g., SEC v. Dresser Industries, Inc., 628 F.2d 1368 , 1379-80 (D.C.Cir.), cert. denied, -U.S. -, 101 S.Ct. 529 , 66 L.Ed.2d 289 (1980); SEC v. Blackfoot Bituminous, Inc., 622 F.2d 512 , 515 (10th Cir.), cert. denied,-U.S.-, 101 S.Ct. 362 , 66 L.Ed.2d 220 (1980).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Strouse
v.
Carter, Judge
v.
Carter, Judge
No. 80-68.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Nov 17, 1980.
Published
Sup. Ct. Okla. Certiorari denied.