McCracken v. Robison’s Empirical Analysis
57 F. 375 · 1893
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1950
2 federal appellate · 1 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 Barr v. New York, Lake Erie & Western Railroad · The President Directors and Company of the Bank of the Commonwealth of Kentucky v. John Ashley and John Ella
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““If the company’s directors were interested in the work and profits of construction, and evaded a direct contract through the form or device of an intermediary contractor, that was a matter for the company or for its stockholders to take hold of; but the stockholders and the members of the syndicate were the same persons, and, however wrong the transaction might be if other persons were concerned, here no injury was effected to any one interested in the corporation, and, however illegal the transaction, there was no person apparently to complain of it.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The defendants, by confounding names with things and form with substance, have built up a theory to shelter themselves from performing their own part of the contract, which is as unsound as their own conduct is dishonest.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““When they entered into the contracts they owned the corporation and all' its stock, and represented only themselves. While directors in fact, they were principals in name.””
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.