7 E.H. Smith 507 - Wise v. L. & C. Wise Co.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 federal appellate · 4 district · 18 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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The contention of the learned counsel for the receiver of taxes rests upon a somewhat novel proposition. ■ It is that from, the most ancient times the courts of England have recognized the right of the sovereign, representing the state, to priority of payment over all other claims, though they may have been secured by specific liens; that the people of this state have succeeded to all the prerogatives of the British crown' as parts of the common law suitable and applicable to our condition. * * * The general doctrines contained 'in these- cases would see-m, upon a superficial view, to go far in support of the contention upon which this appeal is based, although it should be observed that a very important fact present in this case was absent in the cases cited, and that was the existence of a specific lien at law upon the personal property acquired by a levy under valid legal process in the hands of the sheriff. “On a closer examination, however, it will be found that they do not sustain the broad principle contended for. They undoubtedly go far enough to sustain the principle that, when a fund is in the hands of the court or the trustee of an insolvent person or corporation, a claim due to the government upon a debt or for taxes is entitled to a preference in certain cases, or under certain circumstances. * * * In this country the right of the government to he preferred in the distribution of such a fund exists, under the authorities, in two cases: (1) Where the preference i”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Central Trust Co. of New York v. Third Ave. R. · Sweet v. All Package Grocery Stores Co.

2. ““In iliis country the right of the government to he preferred in the disfrimition of such a fund exists, under the authorities, hi two cases: (1) Where the preference Is expressly given by statute, as was the case in U. S. v. State Bank of Nor. Car., 6 Pet. 29 , 34 [ 8 L. Ed. 308 ]. (2) Where, before the fund has come to the hands of the receiver or trustee, a warrant or some other legal process has been issued for the collection of the tax or debt, and the fund has come to his hands impressed with a lien in favor of the government in consequence of the proceedings for collection, as was the case in the Columbian Ins. Co. Receivership, 3 Abb. Dec. 239.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Robinson v. Mutual Reserve Life Ins.