Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 66 U.S. 587 - Sherman v. Smith

Sherman v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

66 U.S. 587 · 1861

Citation profile

28
cited by 28 later decisions
9
cited 9 times by the Supreme Court
7
states following
June 1978
most recently cited

11 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 28 later decisions (9 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1978 · most notably Allied Structural Steel Company v. Spannaus (1978), Noble State Bank v. Haskell (1911)

11 state decisions

60186118701880189019001910192019301940195019601970decided

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 The Ohio Life Insurance and Trust Company v. Henry Debolt Treasurer of Hamilton County · Anonymous · President of Ottawa v. County of La Salle · Barnes v. Mayor of Mobile

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

  1. ““One of the articles of association, as we have already seen, provided that the shareholders should not be liable in their individual capacities for any contract, debt, etc. The thirty-second section of the general banking act provided that The Legislature may at any time alter or repeal this act/ The argument on the part of the plaintiff is that this stipulation of the stockholders in the articles of association from exemption from all personal liability for the debts of the institution constitutes a contract, within the authority of the act under which it was organized, that cannot be legally impaired by the provision in the Constitution of New York, or by the act of 1849, which seeks to change the obligation and impose upon them personal liability; that, in respect to this bank, the provision in the Constitution and the law is void as against the Constitution of the United States. Now, in the first place, it is to be observed that the article of association relied on is but an affirmation of the principles contained in the twenty-third section of the act of 1838, and can be entitled to no greater effect or operation than the law itself, unless, indeed, by incorporating it into the articles it can be made permanent or perpetual. The section expressly exempts the individual liability of the stockholders, but confers the privilege upon the association to subject him to personal liability if they think fit. It was competent for the stockholders to avail themselves of this priv”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““According to the fifteenth section, the association was authorized to establish a -bank of discount, deposit, and circulation, 'upon the terms and conditions, and subject to the liabilities, prescribed -in this act.’ It was not competent for the association to organize their bank upon any other terms or conditions, or subject to any other liabilities, than those prescribed in the general .charter. Now, the thirty-second section, which reserved to the Legislature the power to alter or repeal the act, by necessary construction, reserved the power to alter or repeal all or any one of these terms ■and conditions or rules of liability prescribed in the act. The articles of association are dependent upon, and become a part of, the law under which the -bank was organized, and subject to alterations or repeal, the same as any other part of the general system.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.