In the Matter of Great Plains Royalty Corporation, Bankrupt (Two Cases). Souris River Telephone Mutual Aid Corporation v. Myron Atkinson, Trustee, North Central Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. Myron Atkinson, Trustee’s Empirical Analysis
471 F.2d 1261 · 1973
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently August 1993
1 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 Graham v. Railroad Co. · Lyons-Thomas Hardware Co. v. Perry Stove Manufacturing Co. · Clarke County Cooperative (AAL) v. Read · Claassen v. Farmers Grain Cooperative · Hunn v. United States
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The bylaws of each cooperative, in this case, specify that their terms constitute a contract between the cooperative and each patron. The discretion granted the directors in accelerating retirement of capital credits upon the death of any patron must be exercised under policies of general application. Yet the undisputed record shows that both [cooperatives] in recent years have accelerated payment of capital credits upon the death of an individual patron while denying similar treatment to a corporation which has dissolved or become bankrupt. Of course a corporation does not die in the organic sense, but it can cease to exist. The bylaw speaks in terms of the “death of any patron.” In implementing this bylaw and denying accelerated payment of capital credits to defunct corporations which are “de facto dead,” the cooperatives have, in effect, granted individual patrons a preference over corporate patrons in the liquidation of capital credits. Such a preference violates both . the statutory proscription against discrimination between patrons in the payment of patronage refunds, N.D.CentCode § 10-15-33(4)(b), and the bylaw requirement that such refunds be administered according to “policies of general application.” [[Image here]] For the purpose of accelerating refund of capital credits, we believe the estate of such a corporation to be entitled to the same treatment as that given to the estate of an individual patron who dies. Accordingly, the cooperative bylaw provision here in”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“The cooperative is obligated to pay by credits to a capital account for each patron all such amounts in excess of operating costs and expenses. The books and records of the Cooperative shall be set up and kept in such a manner that at the end of each fiscal year the amount of capital, if any, so furnished by each patron is clearly reflected and credited in an appropriate record to the capital account of each patron.... All such amounts credited to the capital account of any patron shall have the same status as though they had been paid to the patron in cash in pursuance of legal obligation to do so and the patron had then furnished the Cooperative corresponding amounts for capital.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Where no financial impairment will result, the bylaws permit an exception by allowing ... early retirement of a patron’s credits upon his death, where the board of directors in its discretion and “acting under policies of general application * * * ” approves. With this background, we turn briefly to the record here. It shows that both [cooperatives] are in sound financial condition and that each has consistently authorized prepayment of capital creá- its to the estates of individual patrons who have died over the past decade.”
1 later decision 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.