Reed v. McIntyre’s Empirical Analysis
98 U.S. 507 · 1878
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 8 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 49 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2016 · most notably George West Co v. Lea (1899), Boese v. King (1883)
8 federal appellate · 8 district · 15 state decisions — followed in 10 states
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 Cook v. Tullis · Donaldson Assignee v. Farwell et al. · Mayer v. Hellman · Wilson v. City Bank · Buchanan v. Smith
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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We have often declared that the pro-rata distribution of the property of the bankrupt was the main purpose of the bankruptcy statute.... A serious defect in that statute would be developed if its provisions received such a construction as would enable the appellant to defeat that purpose by obtaining an advantage over other creditors. We are of the opinion that no such construction is demanded either by [the bankruptcy statute’s] letter or its spirit.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““It is stated in the printed arguments of counsel for the appellee, and the statement is not controverted by opposing counsel, that at the date of the assignment to Combs there was no statute of Minnesota relating to assignments by debtors for the benefit of creditors.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pelton v. Sheridan“‘ ‘ Our conclusion therefore, is that the assignment to Combs could not, upon common-law principles, be impeached simply because it had the effect to prevent the appellant, by means of the execution levy, from securing priority over all other creditors.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Pelton v. Sheridan
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.