Hall v. Staha’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 18 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Chancery cases are tried de novo on appeal, and we will not reverse the chancellor’s findings unless clearly erroneous. Conway Corp v. Construction Engineers, Inc., 300 Ark. 225 , 782 S.W.2d 36 (1989), cert. denied, 494 U.S 1080, 110 S.Ct. 1809 (1990). This court does not normally remand a case to chancery court, but rather we try the case de novo and render the decree that should be rendered below. The usual practice is to end the controversy by final judgment or by directions to the trial court to enter a final decree. This rule, however, is not imperative and this court, in the furtherance of justice, has the power to remand any case in equity for further proceedings, including hearing additional evidence. Walt Bennett Ford v. Pulaski County Special School District, 274 Ark. 208 , 624 S.W.2d 426 (1981).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Shaver v. Spann

2. “The rule is a rebuttable presumption that directors are better equipped than the courts to make business judgments and that the directors acted without self-dealing or personal interest and exercised reasonable diligence and acted with good faith.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Smith v. Leonard

3. “directors have a duty to inform themselves of all material information reasonably available to them prior to making a business decision.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Resolution Trust Corp. v. Eason