McCandless v. Furlaud’s Empirical Analysis
296 U.S. 140 · 1935
Citation profile
107 federal appellate · 10 district · 49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 255 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2017 · most notably Pepper v. Litton (1939), Caplin v. Marine Midland Grace Trust Co. of New York (1972)
107 federal appellate · 10 district · 49 state decisions — followed in 13 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedMcCandless v. Furlaud (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Geddes v. Anaconda Copper Mining Co. · Hollins v. Brierfield Coal & Iron Co. · Central Transportation Co. v. Pullman's Palace Car Co. · Sinclair Refining Co. v. Jenkins Petroleum Process Co. · Randolph v. Scruggs
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 255 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the receiver does not claim to have succeeded to the rights of bondholders ... [but challenges] the unlawful depletion of the [company's] assets”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“There is no occasion to consider whether the corporation itself at the instance of new shareholders would be permitted to disaffirm the fraud and maintain a suit in equity for appropriate relief. We put that question by. Enough that the receiver has the requisite capacity. A court of equity has taken hold of the assets of this company, intangible assets as well as tangible, for administration as a trust in accordance with equitable principles. Included in those assets are monies fraudulently diverted to the prejudice of creditors.... Precedents exist in cases of insolvency for a suit by a trustee as the representative of creditors, and this though they became such after the securities were issued.... What is here is a tort growing out of fraudulent depletion of the assets by men chargeable as trustees if they have failed to act with honor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Promoters of a corporation stand in a fiduciary relation to it to this extent at least, that they will be chargeable as trustees if they deal with it unconscionably or oppressively or in violation of a statute, unless the liability for such misconduct has been effectually released, (citing cases) To what extent the approval of all the shareholders will relieve them of that burden is a question not susceptible to answer without considering the nature of the wrong and the interests affected. To some extent their position is akin to that of directors, though the limits of their duty are less definite and certain. Even for erring directors, however, there may at times be absolution if all the shareholders are satisfied. Holmes v. Willard, 125 N.Y. 75 , 25 N.E. 1083 . The interests affected by approval will shape the power to approve.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.