James v. ReconTrust Co.’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
April 2016
most recently cited
3 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 666 · 28 U.S.C. § 636
Relies on Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Thomas v. Arn · State v. Gaines · Carpenter v. Longan · Cervantes v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc.
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[R]egardless of MERS' designation as [beneficiary] in the trust deed, and regardless of wording in the trust deed that purports to grant MERS various "interests” belonging to the lender "if necessary to comply with law or custom,” MERS cannot be the beneficiary of the trust deed in this case. Rather, insofar as the trust deed "secures to Lender” the "repayment of the Loan” and other covenants relating to that obligation, the lender [] was the original "beneficiary” of the trust deed for purposes of the OTDA.”
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.