Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 272 MASS 432 - Anderson v. Bean

Anderson v. Bean’s Empirical Analysis

1930

Citation profile

67
cited by 67 later decisions
11
states following
October 2006
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 56 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 67 later decisions — most recently October 2006 · most notably Peterson v. Hopson (1940), Spiegel v. Beacon Participations, Inc. (1937)

8 federal appellate · 56 state decisions — followed in 11 states

17019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 New England Trust Co. v. Abbott · Tax Commissioner v. Putnam · Marsch v. Southern New England Railroad · Ware v. Minot · Warren v. Pazolt

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

  1. ““The general principle is that stockholders have no individual interest in the profits of a corporation until a dividend has been declared, that the accumulation of a surplus does not of itself entitle stockholders to a dividend, that the time when a dividend shall be declared and its amount rest in the sound discretion of the corporation or its authorized officers, usually the board of directors, that the action of such officers will not be disturbed if taken in good faith according to law and not in plain violation of the rights of stockholders, and that rational presumptions will be indulged in favor of the honest decision of such officers.””
    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.