Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 238 BR 438 - In Re Armstrong

In Re Armstrong’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
August 2001
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 341 · 11 U.S.C. § 501 · 11 U.S.C. § 502

Relies on Pioneer Investment Services Company v. Brunswick Associates Limited Partnership · Langenkamp v. Culp · Zidell Inc. v. Forsch · United States v. Waindel · In Re RH MacY & Co., Inc.

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

  1. “Rule 3002(c) provides for enlargement [of the period for filing proofs of claim] in very limited circumstances, and, absent a showing under one of the specific exceptions, this Court has no authority to extend the time for filing proofs of claim.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.