In re Hull’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

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

1. “It is true that the record in this case shows that the lienholder voluntarily came into the bankruptcy court and asked that the property covered by its liens be sold by that court . .. By coming into the bankruptcy court, therefore, the holder of a valid lien upon the estate of a bankrupt comes into an appropriate place and into a court amply able to enforce and protect his rights. By doing so the lienholder waives none of his rights. The enforcement of his lien in another court would entail upon the proceeds of the property upon which the lien exists the payment of the appropriate court costs; and so, in the enforcement of such lien in a court of bankruptcy, the proceeds of the property of the bankrupt upon which such lien exists is properly chargeable with the costs of such court appropriate to such enforcement but with no other or further costs. They are not chargeable with the general costs of the administration of the bankrupt’s estate, such as the services of a receiver in carrying on the business of the bankrupt, the expenses and losses of such business, the fees of the attorney for such business, the fees of the attorney for such receiver, the general fees of the trustee or those of his attorney. If so, the valid lien upon the estate of the bankrupt, which the bankruptcy act expressly declares shall be unaffected by any of its provisions, might very readily be destroyed, as it would unquestionably be, should such costs equal or exceed the proceeds in cases like the pr”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Orchid Island Hotels, Inc.

2. “It cannot be seriously contended that in the instant case, the petitioners came voluntarily into the bankruptcy court to enforce their liens. They were specifically enjoined by the court when they tried to foreclose their liens. Once the referee had assumed jurisdiction over the property, their later appearances and conduct in the bankruptcy court in protecting their interest cannot be construed as express or implied consent to actions of the bankruptcy court. Id. at 202-203 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Max Sung Hi Lim

3. “Thus, in the Ninth Circuit, non-consenting lien holders can be charged only with expenses directly connected with the sale — those expenses inherit in the selling procedure which were incurred by the bankruptcy court only because it had jurisdiction over the property and which would have been incurred by someone else had the sale taken place independent of the bankruptcy court. Id. at 203 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Max Sung Hi Lim