Wilson Baldino’s Empirical Analysis
116 F.3d 87 · 1997
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably In Re: Pamela Knapper, (2005), Reitnauer v. Texas Exotic Feline Foundation, Inc. (1998)
5 federal appellate · 5 district · 1 state decisions
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 Allen v. McCurry · District of Columbia Court of Appeals v. Feldman · Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co. · Holtkamp v. Littlefield · Scarpa v. Dubois
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 79 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t will often be more appropriate to permit proceedings to continue in their place of origin, when no great prejudice to the bankruptcy estate would result, in order to leave the parties to their chosen forum and to relieve the bankruptcy court from many duties that may be handled elsewhere.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he bankruptcy court is also prohibited from reviewing the state court's judgment by the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which prohibits lower federal court's from sitting as effective courts of appeal for state court judgments.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Rooker-Feldman has often been applied to preclude bankruptcy court review of state court decisions. See Reitnauer v. Texas Exotic Feline Found., Inc. (In re Reitnauer), 152 F.3d 341 (5th Cir.1998); Baldino v. Wilson (In re Wilson), 116 F.3d 87 (3d Cir.1997); Goetzman, 91 F.3d at 1177; Besing v. Hawthorne (In re Besing), 981 F.2d 1488, 1496 (5th Cir.) (‘The Bankruptcy Code was not intended to give litigants a second chance to challenge a state court judgment nor did it intend for the Bankruptcy Court to serve as an appellate court.’) (quoting G & R Mfg.Co. v. Gunia (In re G & R Mfg. Co.), 91 B.R. 991, 994 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.1988) cert. denied, 510 U.S. 821 , 114 S.Ct. 79 , 126 L.Ed.2d 47 (1993); Ferren v. Searcy Winnelson Co. (In re Ferren), 227 B.R. 279 (8th Cir. BAP 1998); Hatcher, 218 B.R. at 446-47 ; Johnson, 210 B.R. at 1006 ; Beardslee v. Beardslee (In re Beardslee), 209 B.R. 1004 (Bankr.D.Kan.1997)).”
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.