Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 396 FSUPP 324 - In Re Kassuba

In Re Kassuba’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

13
cited by 13 later decisions
January 1997
most recently cited

2 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently January 1997

2 federal appellate ·

60197519801990decided

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 Ohio v. Kentucky · Thompson v. Magnolia Petroleum Co. · Fontainebleau Hotel Corporation v. Simon · Slenderella Systems of Berkeley, Inc. v. Pacific Telephone & Telegraph Co. · In the Matter of Best Re-Manufacturing Co., Debtor. Don Rothman, Receiver v. The Pacific Telephone and Telegraph Company

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

  1. “(T)ariffs and related laws are no different from any state law granting a party a right against a debtor. If a debtor becomes delinquent on a loan payment, for example, the creditor is entitled, under state law, to recover a judgment on the debt. If the creditor has not done so by the time a bankruptcy petition is filed by the debtor, however, his state law right is subordinated to the federal bankruptcy laws (assuming of course that the creditor does not hold a security interest in any of the debtor's property). The telephone company has offered no cogent reason why it should be treated differently. Before the filing of the petition, it had certain rights under state law. After the filing of the petition, the demands of the bankruptcy laws take precedence. If a creditor, like the telephone company, could continue to enforce his state law rights after the initiation of bankruptcy proceedings, the bankruptcy laws would be meaningless. Their very purpose is to suspend the normal operation of rights and obligations between the debtor and his creditors.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “allowing Bell (the telephone company) to recover its pre-filing charges, an unsecured claim, would be tantamount to a preference or priority and unfair to other unsecured creditors.”
    2 later decisions 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.