Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 263 F.3d 862 - In Re: Thomas Banks

In Re: Thomas Banks’s Empirical Analysis

2001

Citation profile

52
cited by 52 later decisions
1
states following
July 2023
most recently cited

3 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently July 2023 · most notably Sicroff v. E, Thiara v. Spycher Bros. (In Re Thiara) (2002)

3 district · 1 state decisions

250200120102020decided

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 Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Butner v. United States · Brown III v. Felsen · Kawaauhau v. Geiger · In Re Robert J. Young and Donna M. Young, Debtors. Fowler Brothers v. Robert J. Young and Donna M. Young

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

  1. “[T]he definition of `claim' in bankruptcy is exceedingly broad. A `claim' is `a right to payment, whether or not such right is reduced to judgment....'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[Tjhere is no requirement that the allegations of a complaint filed in state court prior to a debtor filing a petition in bankruptcy correspond to the elements of the grounds contained in § 523(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. Otherwise, plaintiffs in state court would be required to anticipate the bankruptcy of every defendant and litigate every conceivable issue under § 523(a) in the event a defendant should subsequently file bankruptcy. Such needless litigation is not required by the Bankruptcy Code.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The general characteristics of an express trust are 1) sufficient words to create a trust; 2) a definite subject; and 3) a certain and ascertained object or res. The intent to create a trust relationship rather than a contractual relationship is the key element in determining the existence of an express trust.”
    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.