Cunningham v. Elco Distributors, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
189 F.2d 87 · 1951
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently September 2006 · most notably Northern Trust Co. v. Garman (1980), Cle-Ware Industries, Inc. v. Sokolsky (1974)
17 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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 Morimura, Arai & Co. v. Taback · Levy v. Industrial Finance Corp. · Gerdes v. Lustgarten · Ohio Valley Bank Co. v. Mack · Banks v. Siegel
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““No principle has been more firmly established in this circuit than that concurrent findings of the referee in bankruptcy and the district judge are not to be set aside, except upon clear demonstration of mistake.” 189 F.2d at 88-89 .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is clear from the language of the statute that the purpose of Congress was to prevent any person from falsifying in writing his financial condition and thereby obtaining money or property on credit, or an extension or renewal of credit without suffering the consequential penalty of being denied the privilege of discharging his debts in bankruptcy. The objective was to prevent benefit from fraud or fraudulent falsification in commercial or any other sort of business transactions. A court of equity in protecting the rights of all creditors of a bankrupt will not shield dishonesty. The technical argument made here that the party objectiong to the discharge had knowledge that the fraudulent misrepresentation in writing was untrue or even connived with the bankrupt should not be seriously considered ” [emphasis added]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Hanson“c. The court shall grant the discharge unless satisfied the bankrupt has (3) while engaged in business as a sole proprietor, partnership, or as an executive of a corporation, obtained for such business money or property on credit or as an extension or renewal of credit by making or publishing or causing to be made or published in any manner whatsoever a materially false statement in writing respecting his financial condition or the financial condition of such partnership or corporation ....”
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.