Fidelity Financial Services v. Blaser’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Bane v. Anderson, Bryant & Co. · 434 Pa. Super. 429 - Chrysler Credit Corp. v. Smith · Shebester v. Triple Crown Insurers · Scholfield Bros. v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance · 42 Wash. App. 189 - International Harvester Credit Corp. v. Valdez
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.
“"In any event, we do not perceive that § 9 — 306 creates a duty on the third-party tortfeasor’s insurance company in this case to protect Lender’s security interest. Section 9 — 306 deals with continued perfection of a security interest in proceeds of the collateral, and provides that insurance payments shall be such proceeds. Providing that a security interest continues in insurance payments as proceeds is not the same as imposing a duty on a third-party tortfeasor’s insurance company to protect that security interest.” (Emphasis added and in original.) Fidelity, 889 P.2d at 272 .”
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.