Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 150 F.3d 726 - Bankr. L. Rep. P 77,736 in Re Leonard Chavin, Debtor

Bankr. L. Rep. P 77,736 in Re Leonard Chavin, Debtor’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

101
cited by 101 later decisions
January 2019
most recently cited

7 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 101 later decisions — most recently January 2019 · most notably In Re: Milton Keeney, Debtor. Milton W. Keeney v. Mary Jean Smith (2000), United States v. Hach (1998)

7 federal appellate ·

550199820002010decided

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 Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Adams v. Metiva · Boroff v. Tully · Lawrence Marcus Marc Kasky, on Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. At&t Corp., Jeffrey A. Moss, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, Donna Borok Moss v. American Telephone and Telegraph Company

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

  1. “involves a material representation that you know to be false, or, what amounts to the same thing, an omission that you know will create an erroneous impression.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “For the case to be classified as extreme, the testimony sought to be withheld from the trier of fact must be not just implausible, but utterly implausible in light of all the relevant circumstances.”
    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.