Utley v. Hill’s Empirical Analysis
1900
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2019 · most notably Yates v. Jones National Bank (1907), Caldwell v. Eubanks (1930)
4 federal appellate · 50 state decisions
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 Briggs v. Spaulding · Wells v. Supervisors · Lingenfelder v. Wainwright Brewing Co. · State ex rel. Dickason v. County Court · Warren v. Barber Asphalt Paving 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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It shall be a crime, the nature and punishment of which shall be prescribed by law, for any . . . director ... or other officer of any banking institution to assent to the reception of deposits . . . by such banking institution, after he shall have had knowledge of the fact that it is insolvent or in failing circumstances; and any such officer . . . shall be individually responsible for such deposits so received . . . with his assent.” (Italics ours.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It (the statute) was intended to reach and punish the guilty, not to ruin and disgrace the honest directors, who acted in perfect good faith and without guilty knowledge.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“there could be no recovery by depositors against directors of a bank because of the negligence of the directors in managing the affairs of the bank,”
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.