Tri-State Developers, Inc. v. Moore’s Empirical Analysis
1961
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently July 2017
2 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
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
Relies on Bailey Collector v. Clark et al. · Congoleum-Nairn, Inc. v. M. Livingston & Co. · Graham v. Louisville Transit Co.
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(W)e are not concerned with the question of whether the corporation had a de facto or de jure existence . . The personal liability . does not rest on traditional common law principles, but on the express statutory provision of KRS 271.095 (2). * -X- -X- * * -X- Those who purport to act for a corporation before its governing body is legally constituted must be held its de facto officers for the simple reason that otherwise they could act indefinitely with complete impunity, without ever meeting the requirements of KRS 271.095.” Tri-State Developers, Inc. v. Moore, Ky., 343 S.W.2d 812, 815-816 (1961).”
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.