Rathman v. Booth’s Empirical Analysis
183 F. 913 · 1910
Citation profile
27 federal appellate · 16 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 54 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1955 · most notably Board of Trade of City of Chicago v. Johnson (1924), May v. Henderson (1925)
27 federal appellate · 16 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 Mueller v. Nugent · Fred Bardes v. First National Bank of Hawarden Iowa · Metcalf Brothers Company v. Benjamin Barker Jr · York Manufacturing Company v. Arthur Cassell J B · Louisville Trust Company v. Leonard Comingor
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 54 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““(1) The bankruptcy court has jurisdiction to draw to itself, and to determine by summary proceedings after reasonable notice to claimants, the merits of controversies between the trustee and such claimants over liens upon and the title to property claimed by the trustee as that of the bankrupt which has been lawfully reduced to the actual possession of the trusree or of some other officer of the bankruptcy court as the property of the bankrupt. Murphy v. John Hoffman Co., 211 U. S. 562 , 569, 570, 29 Sup. Ct. 154 , 53 L. Ed. 327 ; White v. Schloerb, 178 U. S. 542 , 545, 546, 548, 20 Sup. Ct. 1007 , 44 L. Ed. 1183 ; In re Eppstein, 156 Fed. 42 , 84 C. C. A. 208 , 17 L. R. A. (N. S.) 465 ; Thomas v. Woods, 173 Fed. 585 , 587, 590, 97 C. C. A. 535 , 537, 540, 26 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1180 [19 Ann. Cas. 1080]; Mound Mines Co. v. Hawthorne, 173 Fed. 882 , 886, 97 C. C. A. 394 , 398; Goodnough Mercantile & Stock Co. v. Galloway (D. C.) 156 Fed. 504 , 509; In re McMahon, 77 C. C. A. 668 , 669, 671, 147 Fed. 684 , 685, 687; Whitney v. Wenman, 198 U. S. 539 , 549, 553, 25 Sup. Ct. 778 , 49 L. Ed. 1157 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“"There are two classes oí cases arising under the act of 1898 and controlled by different principles. The first class is where there is a claim of: adverse title to property of the bankrupt, based upon a transfer antedating the bankruptcy. The other class is where there is no claim of adverse title based on any transfer prior to the bankruptcy, but where the property is in the physical possession of a third party or of an agent of the bankrupt, or of an officer of a bankrupt: corporation, who refuses to deliver it to the trustee in bankruptcy. In the former class of casos a plenary suit must be brought, either at law or in equity, by the trustee, in which the adverse claim of title can be tried and adjudicated.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Shea v. Lewis““Tlie jurisdiction of tlie bankruptcy court to determine in a summary proceeding adverse claims created before the filing o,f tlie petition in bankruptcy to liens upon and titles to property claimed by' tlie trustee as that of the bankrupt is conditioned and limited by its actual possession thereof.” “The test of the summary jurisdiction is that the court of bankruptcy, through the act of its officers, such as referees, receivers, or trustees, has taken possession of the res as the property of the bankrupt.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Shea v. Lewis
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.