Moore v. Penney’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 1 district · 9 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ * * * Each lien stands by itself and is cut out unless redemption be made under it. If a creditor who holds two liens redeems under his senior lien and wishes to preserve and enforce his junior lien, he must also redeem under the junior lien even if it be next in line. The fact that he has redeemed under the senior lien and also holds the next junior lien gives him no other or different rights under the junior lien than would be possessed by any other creditor holding such junior lien. Pamperin v. Scanlan, 28 Minn. 345 , 9 N.W. 868 ; Parke v. Hush, 29 Minn. 434 , 13 N.W. 668 ; Buchanan v. Reid, 43 Minn. 172 , 45 N.W. 11 ; Ritchie v. Ege, 58 Minn. 291 , 59 N.W. 1020 ; Bagley v. McCarthy Brothers Co., 95 Minn. 286 , 104 N.W. 7 . “These decisions establish the doctrine that, in order to preserve any rights under a junior lien, the junior creditor must redeem under it from the senior creditor who made the redemption next prior in time, even if he himself be such senior creditor. He can do so or not at his option. If he elects to redeem, the statute prescribes what he must do to effect the redemption. Within a year from the date of the sale, he must give notice of his intention to redeem; and, at the time of redeeming, he must produce proof of the lien under which he makes the redemption and of the amount due thereon, and must pay the amount of the claims from which he redeems. These statutory requirements are mandatory.” 141 Minn. 456 , 170 N.W. 600 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Graybow-Daniels Co. v. Pinotti