Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 131 F.3d 788 - Murray v. Bammer

Murray v. Bammer’s Empirical Analysis

131 F.3d 788 · 1997

Citation profile

136
cited by 136 later decisions
March 2020
most recently cited

27 federal appellate · 4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 136 later decisions — most recently March 2020 · most notably McClellan v. Cantrell (2000), Su v. C Su

27 federal appellate · 4 district ·

7801997200020102020decided

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 · Pullman-Standard v. Swint · Brown III v. Felsen · United States v. McConney · Cecchini Impulsora Del Territorio Sur Sa v. Cecchini Robustelli Impulsora Del Territorio Sur Sa

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

  1. “(1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(a) A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt — .... (6) for willful and malicious injury by the debtor to another entity or to the property of another entity.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “does not require a showing of biblical malice, i.e., personal hatred, spite or ill-will.”
    4 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.