Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 334 F.2d 389 - In re Pal-Playwell, Inc.

In re Pal-Playwell, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

334 F.2d 389 · 1964

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
2
states following
May 1990
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently May 1990

5 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

701964197019801990decided

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 Oldden v. Tonto Realty Corp. · Mallory Associates, Inc. v. Barving Realty Co. · In re Sherwoods, Inc. · Fore Improvement Corp. v. Selig · Sommers v. Timely Toys, Inc.

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

  1. ““In Sommers v. Timely Toys, Inc., 209 F.2d 342 (2d Cir. 1954), the holding, if not the precise rationale upon which it proceeded, was unmistakable: a commingling landlord forfeited its right to a security deposit upon the lessee’s bankruptcy. Sommers was adhered to in Fore Improvement Corp. v. Selig, 278 F.2d 143 (2d Cir. 1960), where the holding was similarly confined to a commingling landlord who sought to invoke the set-off allowed by section 68, sub. a. We noted there that the commingling landlord ‘by virtue of the section 233 violation * * * failed to obtain for itself the rights thereunder which compliance would have bestowed.’ 278 F.2d at 146 . See also Tru-Seal Aluminum Prods. Co., 170 F.Supp. 902 (E.D.N.Y.1959), aff’d sub nom. Fore Improvement Corp. v. Selig, supra.””
    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.