Porter v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
47 federal appellate · 12 district · 97 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 288 later decisions (4 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2022 · most notably Philpott v. Essex County Welfare Board (1973), 11 Cal. 3d 352 - Kruger v. Wells Fargo Bank (1974)
47 federal appellate · 12 district · 97 state decisions — followed in 23 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedAetna Casualty and Surety Company v. Harry Clifford Porter (from District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1464 (Consumer Home Mortgage Assistance Act of 1974) · 38 U.S.C. § 3101
Relies on Crest Finance Co. v. United States · Glenn v. Field Packing Co. · Lawrence v. Shaw · Atkinson v. Sinclair Refining 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 288 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“made to, or on account of, a beneficiary ... exempt from the claim of creditors, and shall not be liable to attachment ... either before or after receipt by the beneficiary.”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“are readily available as needed for support and maintenance, actually retain the qualities of moneys, and have not been converted into permanent investments.”
14 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Heretofore the test of exemption under this Act has been whether the funds had taken the form of ‘permanent investments,’ on the one hand (Trotter v. Tennessee, 290 U.S. 354, 357 , 54 S.Ct. 138, 139 , 78 L.Ed. 358 ), or on the other were ‘subject to draft upon demand,’ as in the case of checking accounts. Lawrence v. Shaw, 300 U.S. 245, 250 , 57 S.Ct. 443, 445 , 81 L.Ed. 623 . Negotiable notes and United States bonds were held to be nonexempt in Carrier v. Bryant, 306 U.S. 545 , 59 S.Ct. 707 , 83 L.Ed. 976 . Yet so far as we know, those notes and bonds may have had the same or a comparable degree of liquidity as the present share account in the federal savings and loan association enjoys. Today, however, we hold these accounts exempt. Stocks and bonds cannot, of course, be fractionalized and converted into cash in small amounts, such as may be done with savings accounts and checking accounts. But stocks and bonds may be so liquid as to be tantamount to cash in hand and therefore, serve, as well as any bank deposit, the needs of the veteran.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.