Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 136 F.1d 821 - J. P. Browder & Co. v. Hill

J. P. Browder & Co. v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis

136 F. 821 · 1905

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
March 1982
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 1982

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

20190519101920193019401950196019701980decided

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 Morgan's Louisiana & Texas Railroad & Steamship Co. v. Texas Central Railway Co. · Wood v. Guarantee Trust & Safe Deposit Co. · Fievel v. Zuber · Morgan's Co v. Texas Cent Ry Co Texas Cent Ry Co · Receivers of the New Jersey Midland Railway Co. v. Wortendyke

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

  1. ““A bankrupt corporation gave to its employés orders on claimants for goods, and charged the same against the current wages of the men. Claimants filed such orders, and charged the amount to the corporation, which paid the same from time to time, either in cash, or by note or credits on its books. Under the statute [of Tennessee] the employés were entitled to laborers’ liens on the property of the corporation for wages earned within three months prior to the bankruptcy. Held, that no right of subrogation to such liens’ arose in favor of claimants from such transactions, nor to the priority given labor olaims by the bankruptcy act, and that such subrogation would not be accorded them where it appeared that, if it were, the estate would not be sufficient to pay the preferred claims in full.””
    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.