Benton v. Ortenberger’s Empirical Analysis
1962
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently September 1993
6 federal appellate · 6 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 Wilson Motor Co. v. Dunn · Aylesbury Mercantile Co. v. Fitch · First Nat. Bank of McLoud v. City Nat. Bank of Wellington · George W. Brown & Sons State Bank v. Polen · Murrell v. Griswold
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Every transfer of personal property other than a thing in action, and every lien thereon, other than a mortgage, when allowed by law, conclusively presumed, if made by a person having at the time the possession or control of the property, and not accompanied by an immediate delivery, and followed by an actual and continued change of possession of the things transferred, to be fraudulent and therefore void, against those who are his creditors while he remains in possession, and the successors in interest of such creditors, and against any person on whom his estate devolves in trust for the benefit of others than himself, and against purchasers or encumbrancers in good faith subsequent to the transfer. (Emphasis added.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“At most, [plaintiff] has only been able to establish that he shared possession ... after purported purchase, and that was under a secret trust agreement. This is insufficient to show complete transfer of possession .... We do not think, from the admitted facts by the plaintiff ... that the transfer of the personal property was followed by such an actual and continued change of possession as required by the statute, and that said transfer was void as against the ... creditor .... Where the facts are undisputed, as here, it is for the court to determine as a question of law whether such facts show such an actual and continued change of possession as will render a transfer of personal 'property valid as against creditors of the seller. (Citations omitted.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““In an action for damages for conversion the burden of proof is on the plaintiff to prove every fact essential to his right to recover. He must show title or ownership to the property involved in himself; must show a conversion of the property involved by proving some affirmative wrongful act, and must prove the damages sustained by him.” (emphasis added)”
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.