In Re Exide Technologies’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 105 · 11 U.S.C. § 365 · 28 U.S.C. § 1334 · 28 U.S.C. § 157
Relies on Palmer v. Hoffman · Calder v. Job · Lewis v. Gober · Group of Institutional Investors v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad · United States v. Energy Resources Co.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“An executory contract must be assumed or rejected in toto. See Sharon Steel Corp. v. Nat’l Fuel Gas Distribution Corp., 872 F.2d 36, 41 (3d Cir.1989); In re Teligent, Inc., 268 B.R. 723, 728 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.2001). A contract will not be bifurcated into parts that will be rejected and those that will not. See In re Metro Tramp. Co., 87 B.R. 338, 342 (Bankr.E.D.Pa.1988). Correspondingly, all of the contracts that comprise an integrated agreement must either be assumed or rejected, since they all make up one contract. See Philip Servs. Corp. v. Luntz (In re Philip Servs., Inc.), 284 B.R. 541, 547-48 (Bankr.D.Del.2002), aff 'd 303 B.R. 574 (D.Del.2003); In re Karfakis, 162 B.R. 719, 725 (Bankr.E.D.Pa.1993).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Congress certainly could have included trademarks within the scope of § 365(n) [,] but saw fit not to protect them. Therefore, the holding in [Lubrizol v.] Richmond Metal Finishers, as well as the holdings in the other pre and post § 365(n) trademark rejection cases ..., still retain vitality insofar as they relate to trademark licenses. As a result, a trademark license is terminated upon rejection and the licensee is left only with a claim for damages.”
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.