Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 235 U.S. 461 - Lankford v. Platte Iron Works Co.

Lankford v. Platte Iron Works Co.’s Empirical Analysis

235 U.S. 461 · 1915

Citation profile

169
cited by 169 later decisions
31
cited 31 times by the Supreme Court
11
states following
July 2011
most recently cited

48 federal appellate · 19 district · 35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 169 later decisions (31 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2011 · most notably Pennhurst State School and Hospital v. Halderman (1984), Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corp. (1949)

48 federal appellate · 19 district · 35 state decisions — followed in 11 states

54019151920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Ex Parte: Edward T Young · Smyth v. Ames · Reagan v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. · Swift v. Tyson · Murray v. Wilson Distilling 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 169 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““That the bank commissioner is a state officer has not been, and cannot be, questioned. That the depositors’ guaranty fund, and the funds of a failed bank in the hands of a bank commissioner for the purpose of reimbursing the depositors’ guaranty fund, is as much a fund of the state as the common school .fund, is also true. * * * The title of such depositors’ guaranty fund vests in the state just as much so as the common school lands, or the proceeds of the sale of the same, and the raxes levied and collected for the maintenance and support of said schools, all of which are held in trust by the state for a specific purpose. Even if it were not a state fund, it would at least, be a fund under the management of the state.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. ““In State v. Cockrell, 112 Pac. Rep. 1000 , the Supreme Court of Oklahoma had occasion to define the duties of State Examiner and Inspector. It decided that the office was constituted by the Constitution of the state and was independent of the control of the Governor, and passing upon the authority of the Examiner and Inspector over the accounts of the Bank Commissioner, it decided that ‘the funds and assets’ of an insolvent bank are ‘under the management of the state,’ and ‘that the depositors’ guaranty fund and the funds of a failed bank in the hands of a Bank Commissioner for the purpose of reimbursing the depositors’ guaranty fund is as much a fund of the state as the common school fund.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““A suit by a depositor in a bank in Oklahoma against members of the state banking board and the bank commissioner of Oklahoma to compel payments from, distribution of, and assessments for, the depositors’ guaranty fund, is a suit against the state, and, under the Eleventh Amendment, cannot be maintained in the federal court.””
    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.