Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 43 F.1d 465 - Stephens v. Overstolz

Stephens v. Overstolz’s Empirical Analysis

43 F. 465 · 1890

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
November 1961
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 5 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 1961

3 federal appellate · 5 district ·

4018901900191019201930194019501960decided

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.

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. ““An act of Congress imposing a legal liability on the directors of a national bank for certain things which they may do, which shall result in. an injury to the bank, its stockholders, or creditors, and making them liable for the amount of the damage, is a remedial and not a penal statute, and therefore an action under it survives against the estate of a director. Where a bank director makes a wrongful loan of money, from which loss occurs, it is no defense to an action by the receiver of the bank against the director’s estate that the insolvency of the person to whom the loan was made was not discovered’ until after the death of the director and the appointment of the receiver.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““The statute declares the mode of proceeding, the liability of the wrong-doer, and the limit of his responsibility.””
    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.