Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 431 F.2d 920 - American National Bank and Trust Company of South Pasadena, Etc. v. The Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York, Etc.

American National Bank and Trust Company of South Pasadena, Etc. v. The Fidelity and Casualty Company of New York, Etc.’s Empirical Analysis

431 F.2d 920 · 1970

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
September 1990
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 1990

4 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

50197019801990decided

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 Isbell Enterprises, Inc. v. Citizens Casualty Co. of New York · Exchange National Bank of Olean v. Insurance Co. of North America · First National Bank of South Carolina v. Glens Falls Insurance · Maryland Casualty Co. v. State Bank & Trust Co. · National Labor Relations Board v. Elco Corp.

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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “the counterfeit provision extends to and covers all losses as a result of value extended on the faith of counterfeit securities whether the counterfeit arises as a result of a non-genuine signature or in some other manner.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““A document or writing is counterfeit if it is an imitation, if it attempts to simulate another document or writing which is authentic. The deceptive and fraudulent quality of these invoices, however, arose, not from the effort to imitate or simulate authentic invoices, but from falsity of the implicit and explicit representations of fact, to wit, that certain goods had already been shipped to a customer. To hold that these invoices are counterfeit would obliterate elementary distinctions among the techniques of deception. These distinctions are recognized in ordinary and commercial usage and they are preserved in the bond. Not all defaulting loans obtained upon the basis of fraud and deception are covered. In fact, the bond generally excludes from coverage losses resulting from default on loans, regardless of whether the loan was procured through trick, artifice, fraud or false pretenses; the limitation on this exclusion for loans fraudulently obtained through the use of counterfeit documents merely appears as an exception to the general exclusion. There is a difference between extending credit on the basis of pledged counterfeit stock certificates, a risk clearly within the purview of the bond, and extending credit on the basis of invoices that cover non-existent shipments and that have been submitted as evidence of previously pledged accounts receivable. The bank could verify the existence of the pledged accounts receivable by inquiring with the loan applicant’s purported ”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““A ‘counterfeit’ instrument is one that ‘purports to be something that it is not.’ Under the provisions of the bond in suit, a forged instrument is ex necessitate a ‘counterfeit’ instrument; but a ‘counterfeit’ instrument need not necessarily involve a forgery within insuring clause (E).””
    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.