White v. Ewing’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

144 federal appellate · 47 district · 24 state decisions

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

1. ““Any suit by or against such receiver, in the course of the winding up of such corporation, whether for the collection of its assets or for the defense of its property rights, must be regarded as ancillary to the main suit, and as cognizable in the Circuit Court, regardless either of the citizenship of the parties or the amount in controversy.””

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sullivan v. Barnard · Cooper v. Newton

2. ““When a court exercising jurisdiction in equity appoints a receiver of all the property of a corporation, the court assumes the administration of the estate; the possession of the receiver is the possession of the court; and the court itself holds and administers the estate, through the receiver as its officer, for the benefit of those whom the court shall ultimately adjudge to be entitled to it. Wiswall v. Sampson, 14 How. 52 . 14 L. Ed. 322 ; Peale v. Phipps, 14 How. 368 , 14 L. Ed. 459 ; Booth v. Clark, 17 How. 322 , 15 L. Ed. 164 ; Union Bank v. Kansas City Bank, 136 U. S. 223 , 10 Sup. Ct. 1013 , 34 L. Ed, 341 ; Thompson v. Phenix Ins. Co., 136 U. S. 287 , 10 Sup. Ct. 1019 , 34 L. Ed. 408 .””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hurley v. Devlin · Wilkinson v. Walker

3. ““While the receiver prayed in his petition to bring in all the debtors by bill or petition in one suit, alleging that it was so requested by creditors, in order to avoid the expense of a separate suit against each; and the bill was brought in that form against 330 defendants, who were charged to be severally indebted upon notes given for lots of land purchased from the company, no exception was taken to the form of the bill by demurrer or otherwise, but the defendants answered, denying their liability. The question certified does not, as we understand it, demand the opinion of this court as to whether a single bill against all these defendants would lie for the amounts severally due by them (upon which point we do not feel called upon to express an opinion); but whether so far as in said suit the receiver claimed the right to recover from any one debtor a sum not exceeding $2,000, the court has jurisdiction to render a judgment against thorn.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Kelley v. Gill · Fidelity Trust & Safe Deposit Co. v. Archer