13 Wash. App. 371 - Thomas v. Osborn’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently August 2010 · most notably Gossett v. Farmers Ins. Co. of Washington (1997), Sargent County Bank v. Wentworth (1993)
24 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 Bank of New Mexico v. Rice · 75 Wash. 2d 214 - John Davis & Co. v. Cedar Glen Four, Inc. · Katski v. Boehm · 131 Ill. App. 2d 409 - Hutcheson v. Herron · Pitt v. Little
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(c) The writing as signed, by adding to it or by removing any part of it. (2) As against any person other than a subsequent holder in due course: (a) Alteration by the holder which is both fraudulent and material discharges any party whose contract is thereby changed unless that party assents or is precluded from asserting the defense; (b) No other alteration discharges any party and the instrument may be enforced according to its original tenor, or as to incomplete instruments according to the authority given.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““fraudulent” requires a dishonest and deceitful purpose to acquire more than one was entitled to under the note assigned by the maker rather than a misguided purpose.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“probably requires a finding that the alteration has attempted to impose an obligation or obligations upon the maker or other party against whom enforcement is sought additional to his obligation on the instrument at the time he signed it. Under that UCC section, it has been determined that”
2 later decisions 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.