Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 159 ALA 595 - Long v. Shepherd

Long v. Shepherd’s Empirical Analysis

1909

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
2
states following
September 1999
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently September 1999

2 federal appellate · 20 state decisions

501909191019201930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Matkin v. Marengo County · Harrison v. Yerby · Hays v. Ahlrichs

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

  1. ““The county commissioners have the undoubted right and power to build county courthouses, and to make contracts there-' for, and to pass and allow valid claims of the contractor on such account. This is not only their right, but is their duty, which they can be forced to perform, or for "a failure so to do they can be made liable. The fact that they make a contract for buildings, such as courts may think inexpedient or improper, or not as good as they or other persons could make, is no ground to enjoin them from so contracting, or from carrying out a contract which they have made, within the line and scope of their powers and ' duties. Matkin v. Marengo County, 137 Ala. 155 , 34 So. 171 ; Hays v. Ahlrichs, 115 Ala. 239 , 22 So. 465 . Of course, if they make an official contract for the purpose of defrauding the public and for their individual benefit, under color of official right and as a cloak to hide fraud, and by virtue of such official contract or act attempted to have public funds applied, not for the use and benefit of the public but for their own personal benefit,' or for that of a third party with whom they contract, then a court of equity would enjoin the execution of such a contract, though it was ostensibly for the public good and within the line of their powers and duties.””
    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.