Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 10 F.3d 285 - Stone v. Caplan

Stone v. Caplan’s Empirical Analysis

10 F.3d 285 · 1994

Citation profile

59
cited by 59 later decisions
1
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 59 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Forsyth v. Barr (1994), Sierra Club, Lone Star Chapter v. Cedar Point Oil Co. (1996)

13 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions

310199420002010decided

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 11 U.S.C. § 521 · 11 U.S.C. § 523

Relies on Caminetti v. United States · Shapiro v. United States · Missionary Baptist Foundation v. Huffman · Birkett v. Columbia Bank · Stark v. St. Mary's Hospital

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

  1. ““A discharge under section 727 ... does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt.... neither listed nor scheduled under section 521(1) of this title, with the name, if known to the debtor, of the creditor to whom such debt is owed, in time to permit ... timely filing of a proof of claim, unless such creditor had notice or actual knowledge of the case in time for such timely filing ...””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[i]f the failure is attributable solely to negligence or inadvertence, ... equity points to discharge.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(1) the reasons the debtor failed to list the creditor, (2) the amount of disruption which would likely occur, and (3) any prejudice suffered by the listed creditors and the unlisted creditor in question.”
    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.