Schneider v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
58 F.2d 94 · 1932
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently March 2005
9 federal appellate · 1 district · 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
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 83
Relies on American Surety Co of New York v. Pauly · National Bank v. Matthews · California Bank v. Kennedy · Martin v. Webb · American National Bank v. Miller
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Of course when the agent is committing a fraud entirely for his own benefit and not for the principal’s benefit, the principal should not have imputed to him knowledge of the agent’s acts, for the agent, when committing a fraud, solely for his own benefit, is not acting within the scope of his authority. “The real test as to whether the principal is presumed to have the knowledge which his agent has is whether the agent has stepped out of his position as agent and is acting entirely for himself to subserve his own interest, and not the interest of the principal.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Bosworth v. Cady
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.