Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 103 F.3d 17 - Fielder v. King

Fielder v. King’s Empirical Analysis

103 F.3d 17 · 1997

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
December 2024
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2024 · most notably King v. Fielder (1997), In the Matter Of: Bruce Barton Schwager v. Meyer Fallas (1997)

11 federal appellate · 2 district ·

1401997200020102020decided

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. § 523

Relies on Grogan v. Garner · Brown III v. Felsen · Dennis v. Dennis · Curtiss-Wright Corp. v. Schoonejongen · Superintendent, Massachusetts Correctional Institution v. Hill

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

  1. “A party seeking to assert the bar of collateral estoppel must establish that (1) the facts sought to be litigated in the second action were fully and fairly litigated in the first action; (2) those facts were essential to the judgment in the first action; and (3) the parties were cast as adversaries in the first action.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “bare fact that the state court awarded only contract rather than fraud damages does not preclude the bankruptcy court from inquiring into the true nature of that debt.”
    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.