In re James, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 federal appellate · 3 district · 7 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““There are various forms of chattel security, as a pledge, conditional sale, or mortgage. But the trust receipt does not, on its face or by its name, purport to conform to any of these types. It is not a pledge, for a pledge depends upon possession of the parties secured, and, when possession is lost, so is the security. While the title in the case of a pledge is in the pledgor, or in another than the pledgee, such is not true in a trust receipt, where the title is intended to remain in the party secured while the possession is intrusted to one who has a certain interest as yet indefinite in the property. The practice of a conditional sale bears some resemblance to a trust receipt.. Possession cannot be retaken until there is a default; whereas in a trust receipt, it can be retaken at any time. The holder of the trust receipt is not interested in the sale of the property or its commercial or market value. If he retakes the goods, and sells them for an amount in excess of the sum, this excess belongs to the buyer or importer; whereas, in a conditional sale, the buyer is interested only in such amount as he has paid on account of his contract. In any event, the holder of the trust-receipt does not sell the goods to the importer or domestic trader, and whether or not the bank, finance company, or individual has an intention of selling goods to him, it lends him credit and advances the money for the buyer’s account.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Walton v. Commercial Credit Co.

2. “The only situation in which a trust receipt may properly be used is one in which the title to the property by way of security is conveyed to the creditor by an owner who is not the person responsible for the satisfaction of the obligation which the property secures, but where such obligor has the contractual or beneficial interest in the property subject to the satisfaction of such obligation. *Page 97 The creditor may then deliver the property to the obligor who has hitherto had neither title nor possession thereof against appropriate trust receipt. The rights of the creditor in the property will be protected to the extent of the special trust receipt doctrine. In practice the trust receipt situation exists only in connection with advance for purchase of goods, by way of payment of draft against the bill of lading. "The trust receipt should never be used in connection with the delivery of property pledged or mortgaged by the person signing the trust receipt.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 20 Tenn. App. 93 - General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Greene County Union Bank

3. ““The trust receipts conferred a power of sale, with the corresponding duty, however, to keep the proceeds separate, and immediately hand such proceeds to each trust receipt holder. As title to the motorcars was not in the bankrupt, neither was the money received from their sale. And such security title of a trust receipt, when it properly comes to its holder from the exporter or manufacturer, and not from one whose debt is secured thereby, will be protected.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Commercial Credit Corporation v. Bosse