Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 79 F.2d 707 - Counselman v. Pitzer

Counselman v. Pitzer’s Empirical Analysis

79 F.2d 707 · 1935

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
December 1960
most recently cited

7 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Relies on McNeil v. . the Tenth National Bank · Williams v. Vreeland · National Safe Deposit, Savings & Trust Co. v. Hibbs · Pennsylvania Railroad Company's Appeal · Bank v. Ohio Valley Furniture 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Sec. 1313. Instrument payable to bearer. — The instrument is payable to bearer— * * * “Fifth. When the only or last indorsement is an indorsement in blank.” “Sec. 1356. Who is holder in due course. — A holder in due course is a holder who has taken the instrument under the following conditions: “First. That it is complete and regular upon its face. “Second. That he became the holder of it before it was over due, and without notice that it had been previously dishonored, if such was the fact. .“Third. That he took it in good faith and for value. “Fourth. That at the time it was negotiated to him he had no notice of any in firmity in the instrument or defect in the title of the person negotiating it.” “Sec. 1360. Notice of infirmity. — To Constitute notice of an infirmity in the instrument, or defect in the title of the person negotiating the same, the person to whom it is negotiated must have had actual knowledge of the infirmity or defect or knowledge of such facts that his action in taking the instrument amounted to bad faith. “Sec. 1361. Holder in due course free from defenses. — A holder in due course holds the instrument free from any defect of title of prior parties and free from defenses available to prior parties among themselves, and may enforce payment of the instrument for the full amount thereof against all parties liable thereon.” (D.C.Code 1929, T. 22, §§ 10, 72, 76, 77.)”
    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.