Jane Perlman v. C. Russell Feldmann, Newport Steel Corporation’s Empirical Analysis
219 F.2d 173 · 1955
Citation profile
58 federal appellate · 13 district · 52 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 184 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2015 · most notably 1 Cal. 3d 93 - Jones v. H. F. Ahmanson & Co. (1969), Donahue v. Rodd Electrotype Co. of New England, Inc. (1975)
58 federal appellate · 13 district · 52 state decisions — followed in 21 states
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 Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation · Pepper v. Litton · Bigelow v. RKO Radio Pictures, Inc. · Meinhard v. Salmon · Southern Pac Co v. Bogert
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 184 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * Many forms of conduct permissible in a workaday world for those acting at arm’s length, are forbidden to those bound by fiduciary ties. A trustee is held to something stricter than the morals of the market place. Not honesty alone, but the punctilio of an honor the most sensitive, is then the standard of behavior. As to this there has developed a tradition that is unbending and inveterate. Uncompromising rigidity has been the attitude of courts of equity when petitioned to undermine the rule of undivided loyalty by the ‘disintegrating erosion’ of particular exceptions. * * * ””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““ * * * We have here no fraud, no misuse of confidential information, no outright looting of a helpless corporation. But on the other hand, we do not find compliance with that high standard which we have just stated and which we and other courts have come to expect and demand of corporate fiduciaries. * * * The actions of defendants in siphoning off for personal gain corporate advantages to be derived from a favorable market situation do not betoken the necessary undivided loyalty owed by the fiduciary to his principal.” 219 F.2d at 176 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“entitled to a recovery in their own right, instead of in right of the corporation (as in the usual derivative actions), since neither [the defendant who breached his fiduciary to minority stockholders] should share in any judgment which may be rendered.”
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.