Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 344 BR 21 - In Re Jumpp

In Re Jumpp’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
September 2014
most recently cited

1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 105 · 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 11 U.S.C. § 541

Relies on Taylor v. Freeland & Kronz · In Re Jones · In Re Paschal · In Re Johnson · In Re Charles

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

  1. “because it failed to allege any newly discovered evidence, any manifest error of law, or any significant change in the law that would affect the prior outcome.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “It is the number of filings that is the critical, distinction Congress was asking courts to make, not the extent to, which the automatic stay applies.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The thrust of amended section 362 is to burden the so-called `repeat filer' with demonstrating why the automatic stay should be extended.”
    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.