Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 232 SW2D 106 - Saenger v. Proske

Saenger v. Proske’s Empirical Analysis

1950

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
April 1992
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Adams v. Williams · Waples-Platter Grocer Co. v. Texas and Pacific Railway Co. · Alexander v. Berkman · McAnally v. Panther · Albers v. Saenger

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

  1. “The service of a writ of garnishment impounds only such debt or debts as the garnishee in fact owes to the defendant in garnishment at the time. It does not impound debts owed by the garnishee, which, prior to the service of the writ, have passed by valid assignment from the defendant to another. This is true, whether the garnishing creditor has any notice of the assignment or not (emphasis added).”
    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.