Jeffries v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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.

1. ““The creation of corporations, and the extension and amendment of charters (whether heretofore or hereafter granted) shall be provided for by general laws, and no charter shall be granted, amended or extended by special act, nor shall authority in such matters be conferred upon any tribunal or officer, except to ascertain whether the applicants have, by complying with the requirements of the law, entitled themselves to the charter, amendment or extension applied for, and to issue, or refuse, the same accordingly. Such general laws may be amended or repealed by the General Assembly, and all charters and amendments of charters, now existing and revocable or hereafter granted or extended, may be repealed at any time by special act. Provision shall be made, by general laws, for the ' voluntary surrender of its charter by any corporation, and for the forfeiture thereof for nonuser or misuser. The General Assembly shall not, by special act, regulate the affairs of any corporation, nor, by such act, give it any rights, powers or privileges.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ex parte Norfolk Railway & Light Co.

2. “Moreover, the receivership . . . was entirely consistent with the dissolution proceedings and might very properly have been brought, as it may yet very properly be proceeded with, after the issuance of the certificate. The status of all corporations, after dissolution, is expressly preserved by the statute for the purpose of "prosecuting or defending suits by or against them and of enabling them gradually to settle and close their business, to dispose of and convey their property, and to divide their capital, but not for the purpose of continuing the business for which said corporation shall have been established. A receivership suit may often be, as in this case, perfectly consistent with and in aid of the limited purposes for which the corporation, after its formal dissolution is thus kept alive.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. C.T.I. Corp. v. Reading Industries Corp.