Shapiro v. Wilgus’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

146 federal appellate · 9 district · 37 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 365 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[a] conveyance is illegal if made with an intent to defraud the creditors of the grantor, but equally it is illegal if made with an intent to hinder or delay them.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Associated Gas & Electric Co. · Lyon v. Mazeris

2. ““ * * * True indeed it is that receivers have at times been appointed even by federal courts at the suit of simple contract creditors if the defendant was willing to waive the irregularity and to consent to the decree. This is done not infrequently where the defendant is a public service corporation and the unbroken performance of its services is in furtherance of the public good. * * * It has been done at times, though the public good was not involved, where legitimate private interests might otherwise have suffered harm. [Citing eases.] We have given warning more than once, however, that the remedy in such circumstances is not to be granted loosely, but is to be watched with jealous eyes. * * * Never is such a remedy available when it is a mere weapon of coercion, a means for the frustration of the public policy of the state or the locality. It is one thing for a creditor with claims against a corporation that is legitimately his debtor to invoke the aid’ of equity to conserve the common fund for the benefit of himself and of the creditors át large. * * * Whatever hindrance and delay of suitors is involved in such a remedy may then be incidental and subsidiary. It is another thing for a debtor, co-operating with friendly creditors, to bring the corporation into being with the hindrance and delay of suitors the very aim of its existence.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Miller v. Pyrites Co. · Dwight Bros. Paper Co. v. Grigsby-Grunow Co.

3. ““The conveyance and the receivership are fraudulent in law as against non-assenting creditors. They have the unity of a common plan, each stage of the transaction drawing color and significance from the quality of the other; hut, for convenience, they will be considered in order of time as if they stood apart. The sole purpose of the conveyance was to divest the debtor of his title and put it in such a form and place that levies would be averted.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Endicott-Johnson Corporation v. Bloom