Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 795 SW2D 717 - Wingate v. Hajdik

Wingate v. Hajdik’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

78
cited by 78 later decisions
2
states following
April 2019
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 60 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably Murphy v. Campbell (1998), Kutch v. Del Mar College (1992)

4 federal appellate · 60 state decisions

300199020002010decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedthe decision below (from Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston))

Relationships

Relies on Commonwealth v. Davis · Birchfield v. Texarkana Memorial Hospital · Goswami v. Metropolitan Savings & Loan Ass'n · Hardin v. Hardin · Empire Life Insurance Co. of America v. Valdak Corp.

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

  1. “Ordinarily, the cause of action for injury to the property of a corporation, or the impairment or destruction of its business, is vested in the corporation, as distinguished from its stockholders, even though it may result indirectly in loss of earnings to the stockholders. Generally, the individual stockholders have no separate and independent right of action for injuries suffered by the corporation which merely result in the depreciation of their stock. This rule is based on the principle that where such an injury occurs each shareholder suffers relatively in proportion to the number of shares he owns, and each will be made whole if the corporation obtains restitution or compensation from the wrongdoer. Such action must be brought by the corporation, not alone to avoid a multiplicity of suits by the various stockholders and to bar a subsequent suit by the corporation, but in order that the damages so recovered may be available for the payment of the corporation’s creditors, and for proportional distributions to the stock holders as dividends, or for such other purposes as the directors may lawfully determine.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “where the wrongdoer violates a duty arising from contract or otherwise, and owing directly by him to the stockholder.”
    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.