Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 822 F.2d 960 - United States v. Van Diviner

United States v. Van Diviner’s Empirical Analysis

822 F.2d 960 · 1987

Citation profile

41
cited by 41 later decisions
4
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 20 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably Intergen N.V. v. Grina (2003), 718 F. Supp. 260 - Mobil Oil Corporation v. Linear Films, Inc. (1989)

7 federal appellate · 20 district · 5 state decisions

2101987199020002010decided

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 Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States · United States 77-1359 v. Kimbell Foods Inc · Moline Properties, Inc. v. Commissioner · Arizona v. Manypenny · Houchins v. KQED, Inc.

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

  1. “(1) whether a corporation is operated as a separate entity; (2) commingling of funds and other assets; (3) failure to maintain adequate corporate records or minutes; (4) the nature of the corporation's ownership and control; (5) absence of corporate assets and undercapitali-zation; (6) use of a corporation as a mere shell, instrumentality or conduit of an individual or another corporation; (7) disregard of legal formalities and the failure to maintain an arms-length relationship among related entities; and (8) diversion of the corporation's funds or assets to noncorporate uses.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Under the trust fund doctrine the assets of a dissolved corporation are a trust fund against which the corporate creditors have a claim superior to that of the stockholders, and creditors have the right to follow such assets into the hands of stockholders who hold assets as though the stockholders were trustees. A stockholder of a dissolved corporation receiving assets of a dissolved corporation is liable to respond to a creditor of the corporation only to the extent of the assets so received or the value thereof if the same have been disposed of by the stockholder.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Rule 15(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits issues not raised by the pleadings to be tried by the express or implied consent of the parties. Implied consent may be found when “the parties recognized that the issue entered the case at trial and acquiesced in the introduction of evidence on that issue without objection.” Hardin v. Manitowoc-Forsythe Corp., 691 F.2d 449, 457 (10th Cir.1982). The determination whether an issue has been tried by implied consent is within the sound discretion of the trial court. Id. at 457 .”
    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.