Scott v. Armstrong’s Empirical Analysis
146 U.S. 499 · 1892
Citation profile
280 federal appellate · 68 district · 196 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 787 later decisions (33 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2024 · most notably New York County National Bank v. Massey (1904), Merrill v. National Bank of Jacksonville (1899)
280 federal appellate · 68 district · 196 state decisions — followed in 35 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 Scott v. Neely · Butler v. Eaton · Thompson v. Railroad Companies · Scammon v. Kimball
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 787 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“arising by express agreement, or implied from the nature of the dealings between the parties, or by operation of law, prior to insolvency and not in contemplation thereof,”
18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The equity of equality among creditors is either found inapplicable to such set-offs or yields to their superior equity.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver of Penn Square Bank, N.A. v. The Liberty National Bank & Trust Co., Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver of Penn Square Bank, N.A. v. Utica National Bank and Trust Company · Downriver Community Federal Credit Union v. Penn Square Bank, Through Its Receiver, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Wood Products Credit Union, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Penn Square Bank, Through Its Receiver, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant“In the case at bar the credits between the banks were reciprocal, and were parts of the same transaction, in which each gave credit to the other on faith of the simultaneous credit, and the principal applicable to mutual credits applied. It was, therefore, the balance upon an adjustment of the accounts which was the debt, and the Farmers' Bank had the right, as against the receiver of the Fidelity Bank, although the note matured after the suspension of that bank, ... unless the national banking law were to the contrary.”
3 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.