Eastern Equipment and Services Corporation Scott Huminski Dana Huminski v. Factory Point National Bank Bennington’s Empirical Analysis
236 F.3d 117 · 2001
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 5 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 63 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Floret, L.L.C. v. Sendecky (In Re Sendecky) (2002), United States v. Colasuonno (2012)
6 federal appellate · 5 district · 9 state decisions
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 Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. · Fidelity Federal Savings and Loan Association v. D Cuesta · Crysen/Montenay Energy Co. v. Esselen Associates, Inc. · MSR Exploration, Ltd. v. Meridian Oil, Inc. · Hardy v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.
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 63 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Congress placed bankruptcy jurisdiction exclusively in the district courts under 28 U.S.C. § 1334 (a);- (2) Congress created a lengthy, complex and detailed Bankruptcy Code to achieve uniformity; (3) the Constitution grants Congress exclusive power over the bankruptcy law, see U.S. Const, art. I, § 8. cl. 4; (4) the Bankruptcy Code establishes several remedies designed to preclude the misuse of the bankruptcy process; and (5) the mere threat of state tort actions could prevent individuals from exercising their rights in bankruptcy, thereby disrupting the bankruptcy process.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[A] federal claim under 11 U.S.C. § 362 [k] ... must be brought in the bankruptcy court, rather than in the district court, which only has appellate jurisdiction over bankruptcy cases.”); see also E. Equip. & Servs. Corp. v. Factory Point Nat’l Bank, 236 F.3d 117 , 121 (2d Cir.2001). .”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The United States Bankruptcy Code provides a comprehensive system of penalties and protections to govern the orderly conduct of debtors’ affairs and creditors’ rights. And it provides for an automatic stay of state proceedings against the debtor. In this case, the question is whether damages may be sought under state law ... for alleged violations of the automatic stay provision of the Bankruptcy Code. Courts that have examined this issue have held that the federal Bankruptcy Code preempts any state law claims for a violation of the automatic stay.”
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.