Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 403 F.3d 43 - In Re: Sharp International Corp

In Re: Sharp International Corp’s Empirical Analysis

403 F.3d 43 · 2005

Citation profile

211
cited by 211 later decisions
1
states following
October 2020
most recently cited

8 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 211 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably Lerner v. Fleet Bank, N.A. (2006), Pension Committee of the University of Montreal Pension Plan v. Banc of America Securities, LLC (2006)

8 federal appellate · 12 district · 1 state decisions

1400200520102020decided

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 Lentell v. Merrill Lynch & Co. · Salomon v. Kaiser (In re Kaiser) · Kaufman v. Cohen · Emergent Capital Investment Management, LLC. v. Stonepath Group, Inc. · Diduck v. Kaszycki & Sons Contractors, 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 211 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “a. When in exchange for such property, or obligation, as a fair equivalent therefor, and in good faith, property is conveyed or an antecedent debt is satisfied, or b. When such property, or obligation is received in good faith to secure a present advance or antecedent debt in amount not disproportionately small as compared with the value of the property, or obligation obtained.”
    18 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “Every conveyance made and every obligation incurred by a person who is or will be thereby rendered insolvent is fraudulent as to creditors without regard to his actual intent if the conveyance is made or the obligation is incurred without a fair consideration.”
    17 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “1) gross inadequacy of consideration; 2) a close relationship between transferor and transferee; 3) the transferor’s insolvency as a result of the conveyance; 4) a questionable transfer not in the ordinary course of business; 5) secrecy in the transfer; and 6) retention of control of the property by the transferor after the conveyance.”
    16 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.