In re Curtis’s Empirical Analysis
100 F. 784 · 1900
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 8 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1959 · most notably Callaghan v. Reconstruction Finance Corp. (1936), 16 F. Supp. 139 - In Re Owl Drug Co. (1936)
18 federal appellate · 8 district ·
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
Relies on Central Railroad Banking Co of Georgia v. Pettus · Chicago & Great Western Railroad Land Co. v. Peck · Standard Oil Co. of Ky. v. Hawkins · Sanders v. Seelye · In re Curtis
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The policy of the present Bankruptcy Act, in contrast with the provisions of the previous law, discloses clearly the design of Congress that the administration of bankrupt estates should be had at the minimum of expense. Under the former law much scandal had arisen because of the large cost of administering estates. The present act, so far as it specifies the amount of fees of officers whose services may be required in execution of the law, fixes them at a low figure, possibly much lower than is compensation for the service; but it is not for us, for that reason, to disregard the law, or seek to thwart the design of Congress, however inadequate we may think the compensation allowed. This thought is well expressed by the court below in the opinion filed. It is there said: ‘The present Bankruptcy Law was evidently intended to reduce to the lowest minimum the costs of administration, as regards fees of officers created by the act, as well as those of attorneys who may be called to assist the court in the preservation and distribution of the bankrupt estate.’ ””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Allert · In re Taylor
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.