Lawrence v. Deboer’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 12 state decisions

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

1. “‘ ‘ Such liability may be enforced in a suit at law or in equity by any such bank in process of liquidation, or by any receiver, or other officer succeeding to the legal rights of said bank. ’ ’”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Graham's Estate · Whitlow v. Monroe

2. ““It is well settled that a statute, requiring the presentation of claims against a decedent, does not apply to claims against his estate arising in the course of administration, that is, to claims against the funds in the hands of the executor or administrator. It was so held under a similar statute of California requiring the presentation of claims to an executor. Miller & Lux, Inc., v. Katz, 10 Cal. App. 576 ( 102 Pac. 946 ). There the corporate stock was owned by the deceased. After his death the corporate debt was created. It was held that the estate was liable for its proportion of the debt, fixed by statute upon a stockholder, and that the claim therefor need not be presented to the executor. See, also, Plummer v. Light, 139 Wash. 670 ( 247 Pac. 1022 ). The supreme court of the State of Montana, with laws similar to Washington and California with reference to the presentation of claims against a decedent, in the case of Springhorn v. Dirks, 72 Mont. 121 ( 231 Pac. 912 ), held, under a statute identical with Rev. Stat. 5152 (12 USCA, § 66), it was not necessary to present a claim to the executor of the will of a deceased stockholder in a State hank as a basis for a recovery of the assessment made for the benefit of creditors of the bank, following Zimmerman v. Carpenter, 84 Fed. 747 , and Rankin v. Miller, 207 Fed. 602 .””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Schutz v. Read

3. ““The stockholders of every bank shall be individually liable, equally and ratably, and not one for another, to satisfy the obligations of said bank to the amount of their stock at the par value thereof, in addition to the said stock; but persons holding-stock as executors, administrators, guardians or trustees, and persons holding stock as collateral security, shall not be personally liable as stockholders, but the assets and funds in their hands constituting- the trust shall be liable to the same extent as the testator, intestate, ward or person interested in such trust funds would be, if living or competent to act; and the person pledging such stock shall be deemed the stockholder and liable under this section. ’ ’”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Schutz v. Read