29 Mich. App. 191 - Nickell v. Lambrecht’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently June 2013 · most notably James Talcott, Inc. v. Franklin Nat. Bank of Mpls. (1972), Bolt v. City of Lansing (1998)
14 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.
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.
““It would subvert that apparent purpose to adopt the view of those pre-code cases that prefer the conditional sales vendor to the repairman and to hold for the plaintiff in this case on the ground that he did not consent to the creation of the repairman’s lien and, thus, no lien arose at common law. To so hold would be to emphasize, to the exclusion of all other considerations, the retention by the plaintiff of title and might revitalize formalisms eliminated by the code. This would be contrary to main threads of the code: the de-emphasization of title in favor of a functional approach and the elimination of distinctions in the law’s treatment of security interests based on their form.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““When a person in the ordinary course of his business furnishes services or materials with respect to goods subject to a security interest, a lien upon goods in the possession of such person given by statute or rule of law for such materials or services takes priority over a perfected security interest unless the lien is statutory and the statute expressly provides otherwise.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[The artisan’s lien claimant] cannot successfully claim a common-law lien after the property was unconditionally surrendered- If a common-law lien exists in this State it is lost upon an unconditional surrender of the property. [[Image here]] If the [lien claimant] ever had a common-law lien, it was lost upon surrender of the property.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Lott
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.