Moore v. Donahoo’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““There are no special circumstances affecting the claim as a wli'ole, and if it is charged on the corpus it can he only by laying down a general rule that such claims for supplies are entitled to precedence over a lien expressly created by a mortgage recorded before the contracts for supplies were made. An impression that such a general rule was to be deduced from the decisions of this court led to an evidently unwilling application of it in New England R. Co. v. Carnegie Steel Co., 75 Fed. 54 , 58 [ 21 C. C. A. 219 ], and perhaps in other cases. But we are of opinion, for reasons that need no further statement (Kneeland v. American Loan & Trust Co., 136 U. S. 89 , 97 [ 11 Sup. Ct. 426 , 34 L. Ed. 1052 ]), that the general rule is the other way, and has been recognized as being the other way by this court.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Crane Co. v. Fidelity Trust Co.

2. “In brief, this principle is that a receiver may sometimes be authorized to pay past debts and charge the same against the corpus of the fund, where failure to make such payment would result in injury to, or would make it difficult to carry on the business of, the estate.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Southern Railway Co. v. Flournoy