47 Wash. 2d 622 - Glaser v. Connell’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 1992
3 federal appellate · 2 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 Falk v. Moebs · Hanson v. Roesch · Willett v. Central Yakima Ranches 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A holder in due course of negotiable paper enjoys certain privileges and immunities which the transferee of an unendorsed order instrument does not have. A holder in due course of such paper need look no further than the instrument itself to ascertain how much, when, and from whom a sum can be demanded. On the note involved in this case, however, any party to whom it is presented would have to resort to facte extrinsic of the instrument to ascertain whether the purported endorsement of the instrument was made by the named corporate payee.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“. RCW 62A.3-202 states in relevant part: (1) Negotiation is the transfer of an instrument in such form that the transferee becomes a holder. If the instrument is payable to order it is negotiated by delivexy with any necessary endorsement . . . (2) An endorsement must be written by or on behalf of the holder . . .. (Italics ours.) Although the code indicates that an instrument payable to order must be endorsed to be”
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.