3 Wash. 2d 229 - Loudon v. Cooper’s Empirical Analysis
1940
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently September 1989
3 federal appellate · 10 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 Bailey v. Hayden · Churchill v. Ackerman · Lynch v. Mills · Rothweiler v. Winton Motor Car Co. · Fuhrman v. Interior Warehouse Co.
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We think it also the rule in this state that, where a third party converts property covered by a chattel mortgage, properly executed and filed, the mortgagee may sue such converter and recover the value of the property as of the time of conversion, up to the amount of the mortgage. Brotton v. Langert, 1 Wash. 227 , 23 Pac. 803 ; German-American State Bank v. Seattle Grain Co., 89 Wash. 376 , 154 Pac. 443 ; Bollen v. Wilson Creek Union Grain Co., 90 Wash. 400 , 156 Pac. 404 ; John Smith Co. v. Hardin, 133 Wash. 194 , 233 Pac. 628 ; Union State Bank v. Warner, 140 Wash. 220 , 248 Pac. 394 ; Cashmere Valley Bank v. Pacific Fruit & Produce Co., 198 Wash. 363 , 88 P. (2d) 579 . We are of the opinion that the last cited case is especially applicable herein, as to the time when the conversion took place, which the cited case held to be at the time the apples were sold and placed beyond the reach of the mortgagee.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“We think the rule is well established in this state that title to the property covered, by a chattel mortgage remains in the mortgagor, and that the mortgagee has only a lien thereon. . . . This being true, we think it must follow that the mortgagor had a right to transfer the legal title to the mortgaged property, subject, however, to the mortgage, and that such a transfer alone did not give the mortgagee the right to bring an action in conversion, as long as the chattels were still in existence and could be subjected to the lien of the mortgage.”
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.