green
Positive treatment
3.6 score
Treatment trajectory · 1944 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1944
1985
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
United States v. Wenger
See Archer v. SEC, 133 F.2d 795 (8th Cir.1943) ce rt. denied 319 U.S. 767 , 63 S.Ct. 1330 , 87 L.Ed. 1717, Charles Hughes & Co. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434 (2nd Cir.1943) ce rt. denied 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 ; Hughes v. SEC, 174 F.2d 969 (D.C.Cir.1949); Norris & Hirshberg v. SEC, 177 F.2d 228 (D.C.Cir.1949), Speed v. Transamerica Corp., 235 F.2d 369 (3rd Cir.1956). 62 . 375 U.S. 180 , 84 S.Ct. 275 , 11 L.Ed.2d 237 (1963). 63 .
cited
Cited "see"
Sarin v. Ochsner
See Walling v. Miller, 138 F.2d 629, 632-633 (8th Cir. 1943), cert. denied, 321 U.S. 784 (1944), which, relying on General Inv.
discussed
Cited "see"
Aiena v. Olsen
E.g., Grandon v. Merrill Lynch and Co., 147 F.3d 184, 189 (2d Cir.1998); Manela v. Garantia Banking Ltd., 5 F.Supp.2d 165, 175-76 (S.D.N.Y.1998); VIII Loss & Seligman 3778; see Charles Hughes & Co. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434, 436-38 (2d Cir.1943), cert. denied. 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 (1944). 95 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Manela v. Garantia Banking Ltd.
See Charles Hughes & Co. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434, 437 (2d Cir. 1943), cert, denied, 321 U.S. 786, 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 (1944) (duty to speak arises from superior knowledge); 4 BROMBERG § 15.08(210) (tests for determining control). 85 .
discussed
Cited "see"
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith v. Perelle
(2×)
See Charles Hughes & Co. v. Securities and Exchange Commission, 139 F.2d 434 (2nd 1943), cert. denied, 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 (1944).
cited
Cited "see"
Raymond L. Dirks v. Securities and Exchange Commission
See Charles Hughes & Co. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434 (2d Cir. 1943), cert. denied, 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 (1944); Duker & Duker, 6 S.E.C. 386 (1939).
discussed
Cited "see"
University Hill Foundation v. Goldman, Sachs & Co.
See Charles Hughes & Co., Inc. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434 (2d Cir. 1943), cert. denied, 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 (1944); Brennan v. Midwestern Life Insurance Co., 286 F.Supp. 702, 707 (N.D.Ind.1968), aff’d 417 F.2d 147 (7th Cir. 1969), cert. denied 397 U.S. 989 , 90 S.Ct. 1122 , 25 L.Ed.2d 397 (1970).
cited
Cited "see"
Phillips v. Reynolds & Co.
See Loss, Securities Regulation, supra, Vol. III, Ch. 9D, Section 3 (a), and Charles Hughes & Co. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434 (2nd Cir. 1943), cert. den. 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 (1943).
discussed
Cited "see"
Moscarelli v. Stamm
See, Charles *458 Hughes & Co., Inc. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434, 435-36 (2 Cir. 1943), cert. denied, 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 ; 3 Loss, Securities Regulation, supra, at 1482-93; Churning by Securities Dealers, supra, at 870.
cited
Cited "see"
Brennan v. Midwestern United Life Insurance Company
See Charles Hughes & Co., Inc. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434 (2d Cir. 1943) cert. den. 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 (1944).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Securities and Exchange Commission v. First Jersey Securities, Inc. And Robert E. Brennan
See, e.g., Charles Hughes & Co. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434, 437 (2d Cir.1943), cert. denied, 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 (1944); SEC v. Resch-Cassin & Co., 362 F.Supp. 964, 978 (S.D.N.Y.1973).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bissell v. Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc.
See, e.g., Charles Hughes & Co., Inc. v. SEC, 139 F.2d 434, 436-37 (2d Cir.1943), cert. denied, 321 U.S. 786 , 64 S.Ct. 781 , 88 L.Ed. 1077 (1944); see also 8 Louis Loss & Joel Selig-man, Securities Regulation 3772-98 (3d ed. 1991).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Miller, Partners
v.
Walling, Administrator
v.
Walling, Administrator
No. 670.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Mar 13, 1944.
Messrs. George P. Lamb and Pierce Butler for petitioners. Solicitor General Fahy and Messrs. Robert L. Stern, Douglas B. Maggs, Archibald Cox, and Joseph I. Nachman for respondent.
Cited by 4 opinions | Published
[*784] Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.