George T. Adams v. Southern California First National Bank, Willie O. Hampton and Mattie Hampton, Individually and on Behalf of All Otherssimilarly Situated v. The Bank of California, National Association, a California Bankingcorporation’s Empirical Analysis
492 F.2d 324 · 1974
Citation profile
79 federal appellate · 5 district · 36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 143 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2016 · most notably Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co. (1974), Menchaca v. Chrysler Credit Corp. (1980)
79 federal appellate · 5 district · 36 state decisions — followed in 24 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.
Relationships
Relies on Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Goldberg v. Kelly · Bell v. Hood · Fuentes v. Shevin · Boddie v. Connecticut
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 143 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Unless otherwise agreed a secured party has on default the right to take possession of the collateral. In taking possession a secured party may proceed without judicial process if this can be done without breach of the peace or may proceed by action. If the security agreement so provides, the secured party may require the debtor to assemble the collateral and make it available to the secured party which is reasonably con venient to both parties. Without removal a secured party may render equipment unusable, and may dispose of collateral on the debtor’s premises under section 1309.47 of the Revised Code.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[W]e do not consider it conclusive that section 9503 of the California Commercial Code confirmed what the law of California had theretofore been, i. e., that a secured party upon default had a right to take possession of the collateral. This is not the final answer to the touchstone of state action. Were such a test the only one, the California statutes adopting the common law of England would cast the shadow of state action over all activity and pose an argument that could blanket all individual wrongs under section 1983.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence““Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States ... to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.