Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 261 Ala. 212 - Sellers v. Head

Sellers v. Head’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
2
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably 362 So. 2d 214 - Deal v. Johnson (1978), 348 F. Supp. 61 - Belcher v. Birmingham Trust National Bank (1968)

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 18 state decisions

801954196019701980199020002010decided

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

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 52

Relies on Gentry-Futch Co. v. Gentry · Warfield Natural Gas Co. v. Allen · Van Antwerp Realty Corporation v. Cooke · Thomas v. St Paul's M. E. Church · McKey v. Swenson

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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “`There is an implied covenant that neither party shall do anything which will have the effect of destroying or injuring the rights of the other party to receive the fruits of the contract; . . . in every contract there exists an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.'”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““We think a fair statement of the principles on which officers of a corporation may be held liable in such a suit is made in the text of 14a Corpus Juris, 102, 103, § 1869, as follows: ‘The directors owe a duty of managing the corporate affairs honestly and impartially in behalf of the corporation and all the stockholders. They are liable for losses of the corporation caused by their wilful and intentional departures from duty, their fraudulent breaches of trust, their gross negligence, or their ultra vires acts. They are not liable for losses happening through mere mistakes of judgment.’ ””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Where a contract fails to specify all the duties and obligations intended to be assumed, the law will imply an agreement to do those things that according to reason and justice the parties should do in order to carry out the purpose for which the contract was made.”
    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.