Epstein v. Steinfeld’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

28 federal appellate · 9 district ·

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. ““When, the charge is made that assets have apparently not been accounted for, the referee hears and decides the dispute in the first instance. The point of time to which the inquiry is directed is the date of bankruptcy, and the precise question is whether the bankrupt was then in possession or control of money or of goods-that apparently should have come info the hands of the trustee. Being fundamental, this question needs to be examined iirst of all; but it neither involves the bankrupt’s present ability to turn over, nor raises the question whether he should be punished for contempt — except, of course, as the complexity of human affairs may compel an occasional approach to these allied subjects. The two questions last referred to, therefore, do not need consideration at the first stage of the investigation, if the assets that presumably should have been in the bankrupt’s possession or control at the time of bankruptcy have not been accounted for, the referee may, and probably will, draw the natural inference, and direct the bankrupt to pay the money or deliver the goods, as the case may be. If this order becomes final, either by failure to have it reviewed, or by affirmance in the District Court, a definite step has been taken; tlio proper tribunal has settled beyond future controversy that the assets described were in the bankrupt’s possession or control at the time of bankruptcy. “Then comes the next question: Are they still there? Or what has become of them? This is ev”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Ricciardelli

2. ““An order, requiring a bankrupt to deliver property alleged to have been withheld from his trustee, should only be granted in case it appears that the bankrupt is physically able to deliver the property.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Elias

3. ““is to determine whether or not the property required is still in the possession or control of the bankrupt, and that he is physically able to deliver it to his trustee.” '”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Stern