Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 229 U.S. 254 - Robertson v. Howard

Robertson v. Howard’s Empirical Analysis

229 U.S. 254 · 1913

Citation profile

181
cited by 181 later decisions
11
cited 11 times by the Supreme Court
14
states following
November 2012
most recently cited

55 federal appellate · 35 district · 39 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 181 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently November 2012 · most notably Isaacs v. Hobbs Tie & Timber Co. (1931), Baker Thomas v. General Motors Corporation (1998)

55 federal appellate · 35 district · 39 state decisions — followed in 14 states

70019131920193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Sarah Fall v. Elizabeth Eastin · United States Fidelity Guaranty Company Appt v. Mj Bray · Byron Babbitt v. Howard Dutcher T · Julia Thompson Tenant v. Alice Tolmie

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

  1. “it is elementary that the effect of the adjudication in bankruptcy is to transfer the title of the property of the bankrupt and vest the same in the trustee, who has the right under the control and authority of the court, to administer the same, and no limitation on this general principle arises from the mere fact of the particular situation of the property, as the principle is general and embraces all property of the bankrupt estate, wherever situated.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““We think it is a necessary conclusion from these and other provisions of the act that the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy courts in all ‘proceedings in bankruptcy'’ is Intended to be exclusive of all other courts, and that such proceedings include, among others, all matters of administration, such as the allowance, rejection and reconsideration of claims, the reduction of the estates to money and its distribution, the determination of the preferences and priorities to be accorded to claims presented for allowance and payment in regular course, and the supervision and control of the trustees and others who are employed to assist them.” Van Devanter, J., United States Fidelity & G. Co. v. Bray, 225 U. S. 205 , 217, 32 Sup. Ct. 620 , 625 ( 56 L. Ed. 1055 ). “A distinct purpose of the Bankruptcy Act is to subject the administration of the estates of bankrupts to the control of tribunals clothed with authority and charged with the duty of proceeding to final settlement and distribution in a summary way, as are the courts of bankruptcy.” 225 U. S. 218 , 32 Sup. Ct. 625 , 56 L. Ed. 1055 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
    e.g. The Casco
  3. ““No sale of real estate under any order, judgment, or decree of any United States court shall b'e had without previous publication of notices of such proposed sale being ordered and had once a week for at least four weeks prior to such-sale in at least one newspaper printed, regularly issued and having a general circulation in the county and State where the real estate proposed to be sold is situated, if such there be. If said property shall be situated in more than one county or State, such notice shall be published in such of the counties where said property is situated, as the court may direct. Said notice • shall, among other things, describe the real estate to be sold. The court may, in its discretion, direct the publication of the notice of sale herein provided for to be made in such other papers as may seem proper.””
    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.