Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 80 CAL 310 - McShane v. Carter

McShane v. Carter’s Empirical Analysis

1889

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
5
states following
October 1962
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently October 1962 · most notably Williams v. Gaylord (1902), Westerlund v. Black Bear Mining Co. (1913)

4 federal appellate · 19 state decisions

80188918901900191019201930194019501960decided

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 Sparks v. Hess · McDonald v. Bear River & Auburn Water & Mining Co. · Farmer v. Ukiah Water Co. · New-Ipswich W. L. Factory v. Batchelder · Pico v. Cohn

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

  1. ““We think that the provision of said act goes to the power or authority of the directors. It cannot be construed to relate merely to their personal liability, for no penalty is imposed upon them, and to so construe it would be to practically nullify the act. In our opinion, the directors of mining corporations have no power or authority to convey the mining ground without the consent of the holders of two-thirds of the stock given, as prescribed by the act; and it follows, without such consent, the title does not pass; and, if this be so. the question can be raised by any one who connects himself with the title of the corporation which owned the property, as well as by the stockholders thereof.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “‘•Section 1. It shall not be lawful for the directors of any mining corporal ion to sell, lease, mortgage, or otherwise dispose of the whole or any part of the mining' ground owned or held by such corporation, nor to purchase or obtain, in any way. any additional mining ground, unless such act be rallied by the holders of at least two-thirds of the capital stock of such corporation. Such ratification may be made either in writing, signed and acknowledged by such stockholders, or by resolution duly passed at a stockholders’ meeting called for that purpose.””
    2 later decisions 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.