Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 306 NY 456 - Gordon v. Elliman

Gordon v. Elliman’s Empirical Analysis

1954

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
6
states following
January 2007
most recently cited

25 federal appellate · 4 district · 25 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently January 2007 · most notably Goldberg v. Meridor (1977), Subin v. Goldsmith (1955)

25 federal appellate · 4 district · 25 state decisions

250195419601970198019902000decided

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

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 102

Relies on Pollitz v. . Wabash R.R. Co. · 1 E.H. Smith 241 - Sage v. . Culver · Niles v. . N.Y.C. H.R.R.R. Co. · Kavanaugh v. . Kavanaugh Knitting Co. · Dunphy v. Traveller Newspaper Ass'n

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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “whether the object of the lawsuit is to recover upon a chose in action belonging directly to the stockholders, or whether it is to compel the performance of corporate acts which good faith requires the directors to take in order to perform a duty which they owe to the corporation, and through it, to its stockholders.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A stockholder has no individual cause of action to recover dividends that have not been declared. All that he can do is to sue in equity to cause the court to perform a corporate function which the directors would have done except for their bad faith.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the object is for the court to chart the course for the corporation which the directors should have selected, and which it is presumed they would have chosen if they had not been actuated by fraud or bad faith.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.