Scott v. AZL Resources, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 12 district · 29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions — most recently June 2023 · most notably Smith v. FDC Corp. (1990), Sonntag v. Shaw (2001)
4 federal appellate · 12 district · 29 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
Relies on Federal Communications Commission v. Home Box Office, Inc. · Getz v. Equitable Life Assur. Soc. of US · El Dorado at Santa Fe, Inc. v. Board of County Commissioners · Jones v. New Mexico State Racing Commission · Ize Nantan Bagowa, Ltd. v. Scalia
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“`Instrumentality' or `domination' means proof that the ... subservient corporation was operated not in a legitimate fashion to serve the valid goals and purposes of that corporation but it functioned instead under the domination and control and for the purposes of some dominant party.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[a] basic proposition of corporate law ... that a corporation will ordinarily be treated as a legal entity separate from its shareholders.” Scott v. AZL Resources, Inc., 107 N.M. 118, 121 , 753 P.2d 897, 900 (1988). 3 . A provision in the 1983 equipment lease agreement provided:”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[s]ome form of moral culpability attributable to the parent, such as use of the subsidiary to perpetrate a fraud.”
2 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.