Billing’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 13 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently February 2020 · most notably Southmark Corporation Southmark Corporation v. Coopers & Lybrand (1999), Grausz v. Englander (2003)
6 federal appellate · 13 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
Relies on Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. · Missouri v. Continential Insurance Cos. · Granfinanciera, S.A. v. Nordberg · Dairy Queen, Inc. v. Wood · Ross v. Bernhard
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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[L]egal claims that may involve private rights nonetheless may, in certain bankruptcy contexts, be decided in equity. It is clear that a creditor who submits a proof of claim against the bankruptcy estate has no right to a jury trial on issues raised in defense of such a claim. A question still exists as to whether the petitioner in bankruptcy is without jury rights in the very same dispute. The waiver theory of Hallahan, rejected by Jensen and Germain , raises as many questions as it answers.... A voluntary petition in bankruptcy does not automatically begin the process of allowance and disallowance of claims. The fact that the debtor may have voluntarily submitted itself to the bankruptcy court’s equitable jurisdiction does not complete the analysis. A court must also ask whether the resolution of the particular dispute at issue is necessarily part of the process of the disallowance and allowance of claims.... The close connection between the malpractice action and the objections to fees leads us to conclude that the debtors’ allegations of malpractice are part of the process of allowance and disallowance of claims.... The debtors have no Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury, not because of specific waiver of Seventh Amendment rights, but because their claim has been converted from a legal one into an equitable dispute over a share of the estate.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“First, [the court] eompare[s] the [claim] to 18th-century actions brought in the courts of England prior to the merger of the courts of law and equity. Second, [the court] examine[s] the remedy sought and determine[s] whether it is legal or equitable in nature. The second stage of this analysis is more important than the first.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The debtors’ emphasis on the fact that the malpractice complaint seeks money damages in addition to disallowance of attorney’s fees is misplaced. The Supreme Court stated in Granfmanciera that “once a creditor has filed a claim against the estate, the bankruptcy trustee may recover the full amount of any preference received by the creditor-claimant, even if that amount exceeds the amount of the creditor’s claim.” 492 U.S. at 60 n. 14, 109 S.Ct. at 2800 n. 14. The logic is equally applicable to the situation presented to us here.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.