New York v. Maclay’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

119 federal appellate · 18 district · 117 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 391 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Receivers of the corporation were appointed by a consent decree in January, 1927, and creditors were directed to file their claims. The decree had the effect of a general assignment. Price v. United States, 269 U.S. 492, 502 , 46 S.Ct. 180 , 70 L.Ed. 373 . “ * * * The receivers were appointed, as we have seen, in January, 1927; and the petitioner, if not preferred at the time of the appointment, did not win itself a preference by anything done thereafter. United States v. Oklahoma, 261 U.S. 253, 260 , 43 S.Ct. 295 , 67 L.Ed. 638 .””

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Ever Krisp Food Products Co. · Churchill v. S. W. Straus Investing Corp.

2. ““We do not now determine whether the holding in the mortgage cases is to be applied in jurisdictions where a mortgage upon real estate is a lien and nothing more (Trimm v. Marsh, 54 N. Y. 599 [ 13 Am. Rep. 623 ]), nor whether, if so applied, it imports a modification of the holding in the Thelusson Case as to the lien of a judgment. Cf. United States v. Canal Bank, 3 Story, 79, 81 (25 Fed. Cas. [No. 14715] 277); United States v. Duncan, 4 McLean, 607, 630 (25 Fed. Cas. [No. 15,003] 927). A mortgage, even though a lien, is one much more specific than a judgment or a tax, much closer to ownership.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Ever Krisp Food Products Co.