United States v. Standard Beauty Supply Stores, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
561 F.2d 774 · 1977
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Seymour v. Hull & Moreland Engineering (1979), Publicker Industries, Inc. v. Roman Ceramics Corp. (1979)
15 federal appellate · 3 district · 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 47 Cal. 2d 792 - Automotriz Del Golfo De California v. Resnick · 20 Cal. 2d 839 - Stark v. Coker · 8 Cal. 3d 369 - Peacock Hill Ass'n v. Peacock Lagoon Construction Co. · Marr v. Postal Union Life Insurance Co. · Arnold v. Browne
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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Certainly it is not sufficient to merely show that a creditor will remain unsatisfied if the corporate veil is not pierced, and thus set up such an unhappy circumstance as proof of an ‘inequitable result’. In almost every circumstance where a plaintiff has attempted to invoke the doctrine, he is an unsatisfied creditor. The purpose of the doctrine is not to protect every unsatisfied creditor, but rather to afford him protection, where some conduct amounting to bad faith makes it inequitable ... for the equitable owner of a corporation to hide behind its corporate veil.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) is there such unity of interest and ownership that the separate personalities of the corporation and the controlling individual no longer exist? and (2) will adherence to the corporate fiction or the failure to disregard the corporate form result in fraud or injustice, i.e. if the acts are treated as those of the corporation alone, will an inequitable result follow?”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“failure to disregard the corporation would result in fraud or injustice.”
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.