Miller v. Hamner’s Empirical Analysis
269 F. 891 · 1920
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently October 1944
4 federal appellate · 1 district · 3 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 Richmond v. Irons · Kennedy v. Gibson · McClaine v. Rankin · Casey v. Galli · Matteson v. Dent
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““With many of the matters decided by Judge Bradford in his opinion of 1913 there can be no valid dispute, as, for instance, the power of the Comptroller of the Currency, conclusive upon shareholders, to order an assessment upon the shares of an insolvent national bank, and, through a receiver of his appointment to enforce payment thereof, Kennedy v. Gibson, 8 Wall. 498 , 19 L. Ed. 476 ; Casey v. Galli, 94 U. S. 673 , 24 L. Ed. 168 ; Studebaker v. Perry, 184 U. S. 258 , 22 S. Ct. 463 , 46 L. Ed. 528 ; when a fractional part of a shareholder’s liability to assessment is sought, the action, though on the statute, is in equity, Kennedy v. Gibson, supra; Casey v. Galli, supra; the individual responsibility of a shareholder, when living, for the contracts, debts, and engagements of a banking association to the extent of the amount of his stock therein (section 5151 of the Revised Statutes, superseded by Act Dec. 23, 1913, c. 6, § 23, 38 Stat. 273 , and section 5152 of the Revised Statutes (Comp. St. § 9690), and the responsibility of his estate therefor, when holding the shares, though insolvency of the bank occur and assessment on the shares be made after his death, Matteson v. Dent, 176 U. S. 521 , 20 S. Ct. 419 , 44 L. Ed. 571 ; Richmond v. Irons, 121 U. S. 27 , 7 S. Ct. 788 , 30 L. Ed. 864 ; and, in the absence of federal provisions, the applicability of state statutes of limitations to suits brought to enforce payment of an assessment, McClaine v. Rankin, 197 U. S. 154 , 25 S.”
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.