Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 294 B.R. 260 - Shaw v. Ehrlich

Shaw v. Ehrlich’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
2
states following
February 2016
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 2 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 109 · 11 U.S.C. § 348 · 11 U.S.C. § 349 · 11 U.S.C. § 362

Relies on A.H. Robins Co. v. Piccinin · Carolin Corp. v. Miller · Grady v. Ah Robins Company Incorporated · Bowers v. Atlanta Motor Speedway, Inc. · Robbins Robbins v. C Robbins

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

  1. “The Fourth Circuit has not made exceptions of the immediate and automatic application of the stay, even in cases of a petitioner seeking to cause creditors hardship or delay by abusing the protections of the bankruptcy system and filing in bad faith.... If the Fourth Circuit views bad faith petitioners as eligible for the protections of the automatic stay until their petitions are dismissed, mistaken filers who are eligible for some form of relief under Title 11 but file under a different chapter should certainly be protected by the automatic stay until a bankruptcy court reaches the merits of their petitions.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “If the automatic stay were not in fact ''automatic” upon the filing of a petition, but instead relied on a decision of a bankruptcy court as to the merits of the debtor's petition, the race to collect that Congress feared in the absence of the automatic stay could still occur.... The burden would be on the debtor to petition the court and prove his eligibility under the chapter in which he filed. Until the debtor acted, creditors could claim ignorance as to the debtor’s eligibility and act to collect on their claims in hopes that the bankruptcy court would find no merit in the debtor’s petition.”
    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.