Schloss v. Silverman’s Empirical Analysis
1937
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently June 2009 · most notably Embrey v. Holly (1982), Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Keulemans (1975)
2 federal appellate · 36 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 McIntyre v. Kavanaugh · Thomas Alder v. William Edenborn · Castle v. Bullard · Cumberland & Westernport Transit Co. v. Metz · Page v. Citizens Banking 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The evidence showed a wide disparity in the financial worth of those defendants. It showed that the financial worth of the partnership was $ 68,038.78; the financial worth of the [sole remaining defendant was] $ 7,686.17. The jury may therefore, in awarding exemplary damages and determining the amount which would sufficiently punish the defendants, have been influenced by the net worth of the two individual defendants and the partnership. And since it cannot be assumed that they attempted to make the “punishment fit the crime,” rather than the offenders, it does not follow that they would have awarded the amount in exemplary damages against one defendant worth less than $ 8,000, that they did against three worth over $ 68,000.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“and not for the benefit or purposes of the partnership . . . will not be considered as within the usual scope of an ordinary business partnership.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“done within the apparent scope of the business . . . and for its benefit.”
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.