Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 41 F.3d 316 - 32 530 76224 Singson Ludwig Shlimovitz

32 530 76224 Singson Ludwig Shlimovitz’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
September 2017
most recently cited

1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably In Re Donald Jarvis and Joyce Jarviss, In the Matter Of: Kmart Corporation, Debtors-Appellees, Appeal Of: Wilhemina Simmons (2004)

1 district ·

160199020002010decided

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

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 327

Relies on Pioneer Investment Services Company v. Brunswick Associates Limited Partnership · Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. Gilbertson · Fanelli v. Hensley · F/s Airlease II Inc v. Simon S-J Swig Investment Company Aircraft Trust No F/s Airlease II Inc Simon S-J F/s Airlease II Inc · In the Matter Of: Unr Industries, Inc., Debtors. Appeals of Unarco Bloomington Factory Workers

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

  1. “where the failure to act was the result of excusable neglect.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “when an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified period by these rules or by a notice given thereunder or by order of court”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “Our conclusion that the bankruptcy judge acted within his discretion in denying the application for retroactive approval disposes of any claim under 11 U.S.C. § 503 . That section provides for priority payment of administrative expenses, but legal (and other professional) fees during the administration of the estate become administrative expenses only to the extent they are approved under § 327 or some other section, such a 11 U.S.C. § 330 or § 1103(a). Nothing in § 503 permits a law firm to recover fees for work that the bankruptcy judge has concluded is noncompensable.”
    1 later decision 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.