In Re Bernbaum’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 1322 · 11 U.S.C. § 1325 · 11 U.S.C. § 506 · 11 U.S.C. § 511 (§ 704 of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1961
Relies on In Re DeMaggio · Wasserman v. City of Cambridge · United States v. Robinson · In Re Chang · In Re Jones
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[Pendency interest] runs from the petition date to either confirmation or the effective date of the plan ....”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Gianasmidis
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.