Briggs v. Spaulding’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

133 federal appellate · 40 district · 215 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 572 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The degree of care required depends upon the subject to which it is to be applied, and each case has to be determined in view of all the circumstances. They are not insurers of the fidelity of the agents whom they have appointed, who are not their agents but the ¿gents of the corporation, and they cannot be held responsible for losses resulting from the wrongful acts or omissions of other directors or agents, unless the loss is a consequence of their own neglect of duty, either for failure to supervise the business with attention or in neglecting to use proper care in the appointment of agents. Morawetz, § 551 et seq., and eases.””

   12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Fisher v. Graves · Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co. v. Ehrich

2. ““In any view of the degree of care to which these defendants were bound is that which ordinarily prudent and diligent men would exercise under similar circumstances, and in determining that the restrictions of the statute and the usages of business should be taken into account. What may be negligence in one case may not be want of ordinary care in another, and the question of negligence is therefore ultimately a question of fact, to be determined under all the circumstances. ’ ’”

   8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bowerman v. Hamner · Virginia-Carolina Chemical Co. v. Ehrich

3. “"(1) Directors are charged with the duty of reasonable supervision over the affairs of the bank. It is their duty to use ordinary diligence in ascertaining the condition of its business, and to exercise reasonable control and supervision over its affairs. "(2) They are not insurers or guarantors of the fidelity and proper conduct of ilie executive officers of the bswik, and they are not responsible for losses respiting from their wrongful ads or omissions, provided they have exercised ordinary care in the discharge of their own duties as directors. ‘•(.‘i) Ordinary care, in this matter as in other departments of the law, means that degree of care which ordinarily prudent and diligent men would exercise under similar circumstances. ‘■(4) The degree of care required further depends upon the subject to which it is to he applied, and each case must be determined in view of all the cirenw stances. “(c) if nothing has come to the knowledge to awaken suspicion that something is going wrong, ordinary attention to the affairs of the institution is suffi-ient. I?, upon the other hand, director's know, or by the exercise of ordinary care should have known, any facts which would awaken suspicion and put a prudent man on his guard, then a degree of care commensurate with the evil to be avoided is required, and a want of that care malees them responsible. Directors cannot, in justice to those who deal with the bank, shut their eyes to what is going on around them. “(6) Directors are not ex”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Bowerman v. Hamner · Williams v. Brady