In Re Mullen’s Empirical Analysis
1981
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 10 U.S.C. § 687 · 11 U.S.C. § 105 · 11 U.S.C. § 362
Relies on Delli Paoli v. United States · Stanley v. Zant · Fernos-Lopez v. United States District Court · National Labor Relations Board v. Deena Artware, Inc. · In re Mullen
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This court on appeal is confronted with the question whether the refusal to hold the appellee in contempt was a gross abuse of discretion. 11 U.S.C. § 105 confers on the Bankruptcy Court the power to issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title. This power comprehends authority inherent in all courts to adjudicate and punish contempt. See e.g. Fernos-Lopez v. United States District Court for District of Puerto Rico, 599 F.2d 1087 (1st Cir.1979), cert. denied, 444 U.S. 1103 , 100 S.Ct. 1070 , 62 L.Ed. 700 . To possess the power, however, does not require that it be exercised. Contempt is a discretionary power — an extraordinary remedy which must be exercised cautiously and sparingly. NLRB v. Deena Artware, Inc., 207 F.2d 798 (6th Cir.1953).”
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.