In Re Ford’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently April 2013
1 district ·
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. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 501 · 11 U.S.C. § 502 · 28 U.S.C. § 1334 · 28 U.S.C. § 157
Relies on Pioneer Investment Services Company v. Brunswick Associates Limited Partnership · Taylor v. Freeland & Kronz · Simmons v. Savell · Thomas Southtrust Bank of Alabama Na v. Thomas · Davis
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Congress and the Supreme Court have elected to treat the filing of claims by debtors and trustees separate and distinct from the filing of claims by creditors.... The 1987 amendment to Rule 3004 defined a reasonable time to be thirty days.... As the Supreme Court has set definite time limits within which the debtor may file claims for creditors who fail to file claims, this court cannot adopt the approach suggested by the debtor. It must follow the mandates of Rule 3004 prescribed by the Supreme Court which include time limitations.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Branch
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.