In re Essential Industries Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
150 F.2d 326 · 1945
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 1980
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Manufacturers' Finance Co. v. McKey · Smith v. Mortgage & Debenture Co. · Mesard v. Ullmann · Zelby v. Karsh · In re Murcott Steel Products 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A clause in a New York mortgage providing for the payment of the fees of an attorney representing the mortgagee in the collection, after default, of the amount secured by the mortgage is valid and enforceable. In re American Motor Products Corporation, 2 Cir., 98 F.2d 774. And this is so, when the provision is sufficiently broad, though the collection of the money is the result of a sale of the mortgaged property which the mortgagee is empowered to seize and sell, but which is actually sold not by the mortgagee but by a trustee in the bankruptcy proceedings of the mortgagor. Manufacturers' Finance Co. v. McKey, 294 U.S. 442 , 55 S.Ct. 444, 79 L.Ed. 982; In re Kashmir Refinishing Co., 2 Cir., 94 F. 2d 652.”
1 later decision 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.