Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 152 U.S. 346 - Western Nat Bank of New York v. Armstrong

Western Nat Bank of New York v. Armstrong’s Empirical Analysis

152 U.S. 346 · 1893

Citation profile

177
cited by 177 later decisions
9
cited 9 times by the Supreme Court
22
states following
June 1990
most recently cited

71 federal appellate · 9 district · 61 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 177 later decisions (9 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1990 · most notably Aldrich v. Chemical National Bank (1900), Williams v. Vreeland (1919)

71 federal appellate · 9 district · 61 state decisions — followed in 22 states

54018931900191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 National Bank v. Case · First Nat. Bank of Charlotte v. National Exchange Bank of Baltimore · Winters v. Armstrong

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

  1. ““ The money advanced by the New York bank was, indeed, at Harper’s request, placed to the credit of the-'Ohio bank, but it was shown that it was withdrawn partly by Hopkins, the assistant cashier, and partly by Harper himself, by the drafts in the name of the bank, bnt that the moneys thus drawn never came into the actual possession or use of the bank. The moneys were appropriated by Harper to his own use, or, at all events, it does not appear that the bank ever got a penny of the borrowed money or any benefit or advantage whatever by reason of the transaction. The mere placing of the money in the name of the Ohio bank involved no ratification by the bank unless it was so placed with their knowledge and assent, nor did the withdrawal of the money by drafts drawn by Harper or by his direction in the name of the bank constitute a receipt by the bank of such money, unless it ivas, in point of fact, received and used by the bank or for its benefit.” (Italics ours.)”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““It may be conceded that the New York bank acted upon the theory that the loan was to the Ohio bank, and took the notes and certificates of stock as collateral. But: the liability of the Ohio bank is not a necessary consequence of such a concession. Ii lias further to be shown, that the Ohio bank was really a party to the transaction, either by having authorized Harper to effect the loan on its behalf, or by having ratified ills action and having1 accepted and enjoyed ihe proceeds of the discount.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““ The business of the bank is to ' lend, not to borrow, money; to discount the notes of others, not to get its own notes discounted.””
    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.