ContiChem LPG v. Parsons Shipping Co.’s Empirical Analysis
229 F.3d 426 · 2000
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Carson v. American Brands, Inc. · Grupo Mexicano De Desarrollo, S. A. v. Alliance Bond Fund, Inc. · Atkins v. The Disintegrating Company · Borden, Inc. v. Meiji Milk Products Co. · Reibor International Limited v. Cargo Carriers (Kacz-Co.) Ltd., Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company and the Royal Bank of Canada, Garnishees-Appellees
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“). However, there are limits to the ease of attachment under Rule B. An existing attachment order is not valid where the attachment and garnishment is”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“might have a `serious, perhaps irreparable, consequence,' [that] . . . can be `effectually challenged' only by immediate appeal[.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“We hold that ContiChem improperly attempted to circumvent the rule against attachment of property not yet in Unibank's possession”
1 later decision 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.