Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 37 F.2d 593 - Cheatham v. Wheeling & L. E. Ry. Co.

Cheatham v. Wheeling & L. E. Ry. Co.’s Empirical Analysis

37 F.2d 593 · 1930

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
2
states following
August 1995
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently August 1995

2 federal appellate · 4 district · 4 state decisions

501930194019501960197019801990decided

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 Texas Co. v. Hogarth Shipping Co. · Warren v. Stoddart · Waterman v. Banks · The Emily Souder · Chicago St Ry Co v. Hoyt

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

  1. ““It is obvious that the only persons who are integrated with the corporation as stockholders are those persons who are stockholders of record on the stock books of the corporation. To hold otherwise would lead to corporate chaos. The holder of a ‘street certificate,' i. e. a certificate of stock indorsed in blank by a stockholder of record or the.holder of a certificate indorsed to the holder by name, is not a stockholder, although he has been given an irrevocable assignment of his transferor’s rights. * * * His rights as against the corporation are inchoate only until the transfer is consummated by the surrender of the indorsed certificate and the issue of a new certificate in his name. Until then he is not entitled to the privileges or emoluments of stockholders, nor does he come under the liabilities, if any, which may be inherent in such a status. * * * Cases of attempted intervention by strangers in intracorporate affairs are not rare. They are almost always initiated by the holders of ‘street certificates’ or their equivalent, and the rights claimed by such persons usually are and always should be denied.””
    2 later decisions 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.