Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 192 F.3d 109 - In Re: Lan Associates

In Re: Lan Associates’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

62
cited by 62 later decisions
1
states following
August 2020
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 62 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably Johnny Ray Herman v. Leroy Holiday (2001), In Re Miniscribe Corporation

6 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

4401999200020102020decided

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. § 363

Relies on Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc. · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Kamen v. Kemper Financial Services, Inc. · Adams Fruit Co. v. Barrett · In re Busy Beaver Building Centers, Inc.

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

  1. “In a case under chapter 7 or 11, the court may allow reasonable compensation under section 330 of this title of the trustee for the trustee’s services, payable after the trustee renders such services, not to exceed 25 percent on the first $5,000 or less, 10 percent on any amount in excess of $5,000 but not in excess of $50,000, 5 percent on any amount in excess of $50,000 but not in excess of $1,000,000, and reasonable compensation not to exceed 3 percent of such moneys in excess of $1,000,000, upon all moneys disbursed or turned over in the case by the trustee to parties in interest, excluding the debtor, but including holders of secured claims.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(a) (1) After notice to the parties in interest and the United States Trustee and a hearing, and subject to sections 326, 328, and 329, the court may award to a trustee, an examiner, a professional person employed under section 327 or 1103— (A) reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services rendered by the trustee, examiner, professional person, or attorney and by any paraprofessional person employed by any such person; and (B) reimbursement for actual, necessary expenses. (2) The court may, on its own motion or on the motion of the United States Trustee, the United States Trustee for the District or Region, the trustee for the estate, or any other party in interest, award compensation that is less than the amount of compensation that is requested. (3) (A) In determining the amount of reasonable compensation to be awarded, the court shall consider the nature, the extent, and the value of such services, taking into account all relevant factors, including— (A) the time spent on such services; (B) the rates charged for such services; (C) whether the services were necessary to the administration of, or beneficial at the time at which the service was rendered toward the completion of, a case under this title; (D) whether the services were performed within a reasonable amount of time commensurate with the complexity, importance, and nature of the problem, issue, or task addressed; and (E)whether the compensation is reasonable based on the customary compensation charged by c”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “In determining compensation for trustees, a court begins by applying the criteria set forth in 330(a). The statute provides in pertinent part that a court may, award a trustee “reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services rendered ... based on the nature, the extent, and the value of such services, the time spent on such services, and the cost of comparable services other than in a case under this title.” 11 U.S.C. § 330 (a)(1). Only after “reasonable fees are determined according to the ... criteria! ] [of 330(a) ] [are] a trustee’s fees ... cut down, if required, to the statutory maximum stated in Section 326(a).” We agree with the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit that “the provisions of Sections 330(a) and 326(a) are independent of one another. Trustee fees should be set according to the Section 330 criteria, not merely according to the amount of moneys disbursed.” As another court explained, if trustees’ fees were to be computed according to 326(a), “there would have been little need for Congress to have provided separate standards in 11 U.S.C. 330(a) for calculating the amount of such stipends.” The legislative history accompanying 326(a) ... indicates that while Congress intended 330 to prescribe the standard pursuant to which trustee compensation is awarded, 326(a) merely caps the fees awarded pursuant to 330. Congress’ description of the -820 separate functions of the statutes demonstrates that a fee determination must involve independent con”
    3 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.