Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 101 F.1d 553 - In re Barden

In re Barden’s Empirical Analysis

101 F. 553 · 1900

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
August 1931
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 8 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 1931

3 federal appellate · 8 district ·

701900191019201930decided

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 In re Meyer

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

  1. ““The labors of the referee and trustee are greater in every case than those of the clerk. The referee, by section 39 [Comp. St. § 9623], is required to prepare dividends, examine schedules, and, if defective, cause them to be amended, furnish information to parties in interest, prepare records, prepare and file schedules of property and list of creditors, etc. In short, he is the court in many respects, as defined in section 1 [Comp. St. § 9585]. As the estates must be kept separate,' the petitions and schedules being different, many questions may arise' as to the estates of the firm or individual members, thus making several cases. Because the papers are or may be filed in the same files ease, jacket, or envelope does not, of necessity, make them one and the same case. The aet recognizes separate estates, and it is a logical conclusion from the aet itself it was intended that each petition, set of schedules, and estate should in the bankruptcy court constitute separate cases. ‘Case’ has no technical restrictive legal meaning. Congress evidently used the word to apply as above, considered, and not, while allowing to- the clerk a filing fee .in each estate, require the officers created by the act to administer, collect, distribute, and settle possibly half a dozen estates as one case. The duties of these officers are more responsible, burdensome, and laborious than those of the clerk, and it is not reasonable to suppose Congress intended the narrow eonstructidn to be given to ”
    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.