Wells v. Sharp’s Empirical Analysis
208 F. 393 · 1913
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1971 · most notably Isaacs v. Hobbs Tie & Timber Co. (1931), Taubel-Scott-Kitzmiller Co. v. Fox (1924)
8 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 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 United States Fidelity Guaranty Company Appt v. Mj Bray · Robertson v. Howard · In re Rochford · Chauncey v. Dyke Bros. · Des Moines Manufacturing & Supply Co. v. Tilford Milling 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The mortgaging of property to secure a past-due indebtedness is certainly not an act done in the usual course of current business. It is a first step to what generally terminates in bankruptcy and destruction of the business. We cannot give our assent to the exercise of such potentially destructive power by a chief executive officer of a business corporation without authority of the board of directors or stockholders themselves. The leading case on this subject in South Dakota, Des Moines M. & S. Co. v. Tilford M. Co. et al, 9 S. D. 542, 70 N. W. 839 , puts a construction upon the statutes of that state above referred to quite inconsistent with the -contentions of counsel for appellant, and in entire harmony with the conclusions we have reached.””
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.