Donaldson Assignee v. Farwell et al.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

57 federal appellate · 28 district · 44 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 183 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““not intending to pay, who induces the owner to sell him' goods on credit by fraudulently concealing his insolvency and his intent not to pay for them, is guilty of a fraud, which entitles the vendor, if no innocent third party has acquired an interest in them, to disaffirm the contract and recover the goods.” Donaldson, Assignee, v. Farwell, 93 U. S. 631 , 23 L. Ed. 993 .”

   8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 581 Diamonds v. United States · In re Friedman

2. ““This is a petition to revise, in matter of law, an order of the District Court of the United. States for the District of Massachusetts, entered on the 23d day of February, 1916, affirming a decree of the referee, restraining the petitioner from prosecuting a replevin action instituted by him in the municipal court of the city of Boston, and directing the said petitioner to turn over to the trustee in bankruptcy all property seized thereunder. “From the agreed statement of facts it appears that the Wellmade Gas Mantle Company assigned, for the benefit of its creditors, to one David Stoneman, on February 8, 1915; and thereafter, on the 9th day of February, 1915, an involuntary petition in bankruptcy was filed in said District Court against it, upon which an adjudication was had on the 26th day of March, 1915. “Six days after the filing of the petition in bankruptcy, and on the 15th day of February, 1915, the petitioner, Friedlaender, instituted an action of replevin in the municipal court of the city of Boston against said Stoneman, as assignee, to recover certain property to which Friedlaender asserted title and the right of possession, which said property the petitioner caused to be seized under his writ of replevin on the said 15th day of February, 1915. No receiver had then been appointed or applied for, nor had any restraining order been issued. “On the 16th day of April, 1915, Philip W. Jacobs, Esq., was duly elected trustee, and thereafter filed a petition to restrain s”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Friedlaender

3. ““The assignment relates back to the commencement of the proceedings in bankruptcy, and vests, by operation of law, in the assignee the property of the bankrupt, with certain specified exceptions, although the same be then attached. It also dissolves any attachment made within four months next preceding the commencement of the proceeding. If there be no such liens, and the property has not been conveyed in fraud of creditors, he has no greater interest in or better title to it than the bankrupt.” ,”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Chattanooga Nat. Bank v. Rome Iron Co.