Whitten v. Dabney’s Empirical Analysis
1915
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 63 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 83 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2016 · most notably Young v. Higbee Co. (1945), 17 Cal. 2d 13 - Klopstock v. Superior Court (1941)
9 federal appellate · 2 district · 63 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 Brinckerhoff v. . Bostwick · Bank of United States v. Ritchie · Turner v. Markham · Lloyd v. Kirkwood · Richards v. East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railway 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 83 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he principle does not apply after discovery of the fraud by a protesting stockholder, and cannot be applied to a cause of action predicated upon negligence. " Id. (emphasis added) (citation omitted); see also Whitten v. Dabney, 171 Cal. 621, 154 P. 312, 315 (1915) ("So long as the corporation itself remains under disability and is powerless to act by virtue of the fact that its control is in the hands of a board of directors accused of participation in the frauds, the statute of limitations does not run against it.”
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.