Humphreys v. Mooney’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 district · 14 state decisions

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

1. ““We are not aware of any authority, certainly none was cited at the argument, to warrant the instruction that, in consequence of an omission to comply with the requisitions of law' in the organization of a corporation, by which its proceedings were rendered void, persons who had subscribed for and taken stock in the company thereby became partners. The doctrine seems to us to m quite novel and somewhat startling. Surely it cannot be, in the absence of all fraudulent intent (and none was proved or alleged in this case), that such a legal result follows as to fasten on parties involuntarily for such a cause the enlarged liability of copartners, a liability neither contemplated nor assented to by them. The very statement of the proposition carries with it a sufficient refutation. No such rule can follow, unless a principle of law be established, founded on no authority, and required by no public exigency. Corporations are known and recognized as legal entities, with rights and powers clearly defined and well understood, and wholly distinct and different from those of individuáis and copartnerships. Persons who subscribe for and take stock in them are subject to certain fixed and limited liabilities, which they voluntarily assume, and these liabilities are not to be extended and enlarged, so as to affect innocent parties, beyond the letter of the law. A copartnership cannot take upon itself the functions of a corporation, nor can a corporation or its members be made subject to th”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Western Bank & Trust Co.