Kepler v. Slade’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably Gonzales v. Hernandez (1999), 2001 WI App 64 - Bank of Sun Prairie v. Marshall Development Co. (2001)
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 18 state decisions
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 Woolwine v. Furr's, Inc. · Silva v. State · State v. Smith · City Consumer Services, Inc. v. Peters · 185 N.J. Super. 289 - Central Penn Nat'l Bank v. Stonebridge Ltd.
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under the traditional common law rule, upon default by the mortgagor, a mortgagee has independent remedies which he or she may pursue. The mortgagee may sue either on the note or foreclose on the mortgage, and may pursue all remedies “at the same time or consequently.” As long as there is no double recovery on the debt, the mortgagee may pursue either or both remedies. Absent a statute to the contrary, “state courts have uniformly held that holders of notes secured by a deed of trust can both sue the maker or guarantor and foreclose on the property regardless of which action they pursue first.” The distinction between the two remedies is found in the historic view that a foreclosure action is purely quasi in rem, affording relief only against the secured property, and a suit on a bond or note is in personam.[ 5 ] A judgment of foreclo sure applies only to the property secured by the mortgage, and does not impose any personal liability on the mortgagor. If the foreclosure of the mortgaged property fails to satisfy the debt secured by the mortgage, the creditor may then pursue an action on the underlying note. Some jurisdictions have adopted legislation providing for a “one action” rule that requires a mortgagee to file only one lawsuit in which he.or she pursues all remedies for a debt that is secured by a mortgage. One of the purposes of such statutes is to protect the mortgagor from multiple lawsuits since the mortgagee’s separate causes of action, even though theoretically ”
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.