Coleman v. Tepel’s Empirical Analysis
230 F. 63 · 1916
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1964
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 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 Upton Assignee v. Tribilcock · Central Transportation Co. v. Pullman's Palace Car Co. · Sanger v. Upton · Farrington v. Tennessee · Maryland Trust Co. v. National Mechanics Bank
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It has been urged that, if the transaction is void, it is void only as to existing creditors, and not as to those with whom the corporation subsequently incurred obligations, upon the ground that, to avoid a transfer of property in fraud of future creditors, there must he present actual intent to defraud. * -? * We are inclined to hold, upon the reasoning of well-considered authorities, that the void character of such a transaction as to future creditors does not depend upon fraudulent intent, and that when a stockholder, with the knowledge he has, or with that with which he is charged, concerning the financial condition of the corporation, engages in a transaction which results in a depletion for his advantage of corporate assets below the subscribed capital, or below existing liabilities, as the law may be, and becomes a party to the solvent appearance of a business that is intended to he continued, he is hound by his act, both to existing and future creditors, when its direct object or immediate consequence is the insolvency of the corporation .and injury to creditors.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Jesson v. Noyes
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.