Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 99 NY 185 - Brinckerhoff v. . Bostwick

Brinckerhoff v. . Bostwick’s Empirical Analysis

1885

Citation profile

147
cited by 147 later decisions
19
states following
November 2006
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 115 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 147 later decisions — most recently November 2006 · most notably Pollitz v. . Wabash R.R. Co. (1912), Hirshfeld v. . Fitzgerald (1898)

19 federal appellate · 115 state decisions — followed in 19 states

2601885189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Brinckerhoff v. . Bostwick

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

  1. “It is true, that at any time before judgment, the original plaintiff, before the others were made parties, could have discontinued the suit or could have settled his individual damages with the defendants, and have executed a release which would have been effectual as to him. But if he had prosecuted the action to judgment, then the judgment would have been for the benefit of all the stockholders, and he would then have ceased to have control over it, because the rights of the other stockholders would at once have attached thereto. The bringing of the action by the original plaintiff did not prevent the other stockholders from bringing similar actions.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““None of the provisions of this chapter shall apply to suits against directors or stockholders of any moneyed corporations, to recover any penalty or forfeiture imposed, or to enforce any liability created by the second title of the first part of the Revised Statutes; but all such suits shall be brought within six years after the discovery, by the aggrieved party, of the facts upon which such penalty or forfeiture attached, or by which such liability was created.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““The action was commenced by Theodore Brinckerhoff, suing on his own behalf and for the benefit of the other stockholders of the bank; and therefore, for the purpose of the statute of limitations, the action must be treated as if all the stockholders were plaintiffs. The action is really the action of all the stockholders, as it was necessarily commenced in their behalf and for their benefit. It could not have been commenced by one stockholder for himself alone.””
    1 later decision 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.