Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 549 F.2d 20 - Howard Dragstrem v. Richard E. Obermeyer, United States of America, Intervenor-Appellant

Howard Dragstrem v. Richard E. Obermeyer, United States of America, Intervenor-Appellant’s Empirical Analysis

549 F.2d 20 · 1977

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
3
states following
November 2020
most recently cited

16 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently November 2020 · most notably Arlie Glen Skelton, Jr. v. General Motors Corporation (1981), Haas v. Internal Revenue Service (1994)

16 federal appellate · 2 district · 3 state decisions

100197719801990200020102020decided

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

Applies 26 U.S.C. § 6323

Relies on Aquilino v. United States · Markham v. Allen · Waterman v. Canal-Louisiana Bank & Trust Co. · Gemsco, Inc. v. Walling · Yumich v. City of Chicago

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

  1. “specific legislative intent ... to enable creditors to protect certain types of security interests against subsequent federal tax liens, and to do so by taking the same steps already necessary under state law to protect their interests against various other types of competing claims.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “any interest in property acquired by contract for the purpose of securing payment or performance of an obligation or indemnifying against loss or liability. A security interest exists at any time (A) if, at such time the property is in existence and the interest has become protected under local law against a subsequent judgment lien arising out of an unsecured obligation, and (B) to the extent that, at such time, the holder has parted with money or money’s worth.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(1) Except as otherwise provided in subsection (2), an unperfected security interest is subordinate to the rights of (b) a person who becomes a lien creditor [without knowledge of the security interest and] before [it] the security interest is perfected; (Bracketed portions deleted; underlined portions added.)”
    2 later decisions 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.