Towne v. McElligott’s Empirical Analysis
274 F. 960 · 1921
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently November 1951
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Eisner v. Macomber · Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad · Safe Deposit & Trust Co. of Baltimore v. Miles · Towne v. Eisner
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The plaintiff answers this argument by saying that, if so, all shares at any time held by a stockholder must be brought into hotchpot and averaged. I scarcely think that consistency requires me to go so. far. The law may, and in fact does, recognize an identity in every share, which can indeed be traced upon the books of the company, at least until certificates are consolidated, and later subdivided. The purchase of a number of shares can be earmarked by the certificate, "and it is an enormous convenience to keep the purchases separate.”. Towne v. McElligott (D. C.) 274 F. 960 , 963.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Howbert v. Penrose
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.