Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 127 F.2d 284 - Stone v. Eacho

Stone v. Eacho’s Empirical Analysis

127 F.2d 284 · 1942

Citation profile

74
cited by 74 later decisions
2
states following
September 2017
most recently cited

29 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Dewitt Truck Brokers, Inc. v. W. Ray Flemming Fruit Co. (1976), Chemical Bank New York Trust Co. v. Kheel (1966)

29 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

14019421950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Pepper v. Litton · Taylor v. Standard Gas & Electric Co. · Sampsell v. Imperial Paper & Color Corp. · Chicago St Ry Co v. Minneapolis Civic & Commerce Ass'n · United States v. Reading Co.

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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““It is well settled that courts will not be blinded by corporate forms nor permit them to be used to defeat public convenience, justify wrong or perpetrate fraud, but will look through the forms and behind the corporate entities involved to deal with the situation as justice may require.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““ ‘It is well settled that courts will not be blinded by corporate forms nor permit them to be used to defeat public convenience, justify wrong or perpetrate fraud, but will look through the forms and behind the corporate entities involved to deal with the situation as justice may require.’ * * * (Citing cases) ‘Not only is this done for the purpose of holding a stockholder or parent corporation for debts created by an insolvent corporate agent or subsidiary which is a mere instrumentality of the stockholder or parent, but also for the purpose of allowing the creditors of the stockholder or parent to reach assets held by such a subsidiary.’ * * * (Citing cases) ‘And, where the court decides that the corporate entity of the subsidiary should be completely ignored and its ■ assets and liabilities treated as those of the parent corporation, it is both logical and convenient that this be done in one proceeding.’ * * * (Citing cases)” i”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.