Martinez Xiii Smith Xiii’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. ““The appellee appears to rely on Section 114, Title 28 U.S.C.A. Judicial Code § 53, former Code, now Section 1393(a) of the Judicial Code, which provided as follows: ‘When a district contains more than one division, every suit not of a local nature against a single defendant must be brought in the division where he resides * * “This provision of the statute refers to law and equity civil cases, and not to bankruptcy. “The law now reads: “Section 1393. “Divisions; single defendant; defendants in different divisions “ ‘(a) Except as otherwise provided, any civil action, not of a local nature, against a single defendant in a district containing more than one division must be brought in the division where he resides.’ (b) * * *. “Section 2 of the Bankruptcy Act, 11 U.S.C.A. § 11 , provides as follows : (a) ‘The courts of the United States hereinbefore defined as courts of bankruptcy are hereby created courts of bankruptcy and are hereby invested, within their respective territorial limits as now established or as they may be hereafter changed, with such jurisdiction at law and in equity as will enable them to exercise original jurisdiction in proceedings under this Act * * “And may (1) ‘adjudge persons bankrupt who have had their principal place of business, resided or had their domicile within their respective territorial jurisdictions for the preceding six months * * *.’ “This statute does not limit the jurisdiction of the District Court to a division of the district. “In Naylo”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Elk City Placer Mines, Inc.

2. ““§ 2. CREATION OF COURTS OF BANKRUPTCY AND THEIR JURISDICTION, a. The courts of the United States hereinbefore defined as courts of bankruptcy are hereby created courts of bankruptcy and are hereby invested, within their respective territorial limits as now established or as they may be hereafter changed, with such jurisdiction at law and in equity as will enable them to exercise original jurisdiction in proceedings under this Act, in vacation, in chambers, and during their respective terms, as they are now or may be hereafter held, to— “(1) Adjudge persons bankrupt who have had their principal place of business, resided, or had their domicile within their respective territorial jurisdictions for the preceding six months, or for a longer portion of the preceding six months than in any other jurisdiction, or who do not have their principal place of business, reside, or have their domicile within the United States, but have property within their jurisdiction, or in any cases transferred to them pursuant to this Act; * * * ””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Briney v. Burley (In Re Burley)

3. ““ 'Under this first subdivision, the judge may upon timely and sufficient objection transfer a case brought in the wrong court of bankruptcy. This first subdivision also incorporates the amendment to section 1406 which changed “shall” to “may, in the interest of justice.” Ordinarily, no doubt the venue rules in bankruptcy will serve the interests of justice, but in the event that in the special case they do not, the judge will have discretion to retain the proceeding ’ (Emphasis supplied by the court.)””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Miller