Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 31 F.3d 842 - Bernard v. Coyne

Bernard v. Coyne’s Empirical Analysis

31 F.3d 842 · 1994

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Standing Committee on Discipline of United States District Court v. Yagman (1995), In re Kensington International Ltd. (2003)

10 federal appellate · 1 district · 2 state decisions

120199420002010decided

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

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 307 · 11 U.S.C. § 324 · 11 U.S.C. § 341 · 28 U.S.C. § 144 · 28 U.S.C. § 1912 · 28 U.S.C. § 455 · 28 U.S.C. § 581 (§ 224 of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 (Title 11)) · 28 U.S.C. § 586 (§ 224 of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 (Title 11))

Relies on Davis v. Board of School Commissioners · United States v. Balistrieri · SCA Services, Inc. v. Morgan · United States v. Sibla · Daniel M. Pilla and Jerome Daly v. The American Bar Association

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

  1. “[c]ounsel for a party who believes a judge's impartiality is reasonably subject to question has not only a professional duty to his client to raise the matter, but an independent responsibility as an officer of the court. Judges are not omniscient and, despite all safeguards, may overlook a conflict of interest. A lawyer who reasonably believes that the judge before whom he is appearing should not sit must raise the issue so it may be confronted and put to rest. Any other course would risk undermining public confidence in our judicial system. -”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Once appointed [to a case], a Chapter 7 trustee can be removed from a case only by order of the bankruptcy court. 11 U.S.C. § 324. The U.S. Trustee can, however, remove or suspend trustees from the panel for performance or other reasons.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “may also intervene and appear at any level of the proceedings from the bankruptcy court on, 11 U.S.C. S 307, as either a party or an amicus.”
    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.