Jones v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1897
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 74 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently September 1996 · most notably Chandler v. Chicago & Alton Railroad (1913), McKinney v. Gannett Co. (1987)
14 federal appellate · 2 district · 74 state decisions — followed in 22 states
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 Hobbs v. McLean · Root v. Railway Co. · Humphreys v. McKissock · West v. Camden · Pullman's Palace Car Co v. Missouri Pac Ry 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 90 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““But it is said that the contract is against public policy and void, for the reason that it couples with a sale of stock in the corporation an agreement to give to the purchaser a position for five years at a large salary, and, in addition, the position of director and president of the corporation. “ Counsel cite many cases in support of their position. It is undoubtedly true that an agreement by one stockholder for the sale, directly or indirectly, of an office in a corporation, or of a permanent position therein, ‘would be against public policy and void,’ though the contracting stockholder had shares sufficient in amount to give him control in the election of officers. By such agreement he might be required to act contrary to the duty he owed the company and other stockholders. West v. Camden, 135 U. S. 507 (10 Sup. Ct. 838). “ Each shareholder in the corporation has a right to rely upon the judgment of all the others, in the election of directors and officers, and any agreement which puts it out of his power to exercise such judgment is against public policy.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Scripps v. Sweeney““There can be no doubt that the board of directors may invest the president with authority to act as chief executive officer of the company. This may be done either by an express resolution or by acquiescence in the course of dealing. A person dealing with the president of a corporation in the usual manner, and' within the powers which the president has been accustomed to exercise without the dissent of the directors, would be entitled to assume that the president had actually been invested with those powers.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Wilde v. Zimmerman“Under the contract, plaintiff purchased 1,667 shares of stock in the corporation, for which he paid $80,000; and, in consideration thereof, he was to have the 'control and management' of the Post Dispatch for five years, at an annual salary of $10,000.”
1 later decision 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.