Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 426 F.2d 102 - In the Matter of Evelyn Halpern v. Warren C. Schwartz, Trustee in Bankruptcy

In the Matter of Evelyn Halpern v. Warren C. Schwartz, Trustee in Bankruptcy’s Empirical Analysis

426 F.2d 102 · 1970

Citation profile

81
cited by 81 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
4
states following
July 2021
most recently cited

37 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 81 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2021 · most notably Gelb v. Royal Globe Insurance (1986), Winters v. Lavine (1978)

37 federal appellate · 2 district · 7 state decisions

300197019801990200020102020decided

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 Norton v. Larney · Massachusetts v. United States · Railroad Companies v. Schutte · Gratiot County State Bank v. Johnson ex rel. St. Louis Chemical Co. · Henry Friend v. James Talcott

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

  1. “It is well established that although an issue was fully litigated and a finding on the issue was made in the prior litigation, the prior judgment will not foreclose reconsideration of the same issue if that issue was not necessary to the rendering of the prior judgment, and hence was incidental, collateral, or immaterial to that judgment.”
    12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) that the act complained of was done at a time subsequent to one year before the date of the filing of the petition; (2) with actual intent to hinder, delay or defraud a creditor or an officer of the estate charged with custody of property under the Bankruptcy Code; (3) that the act was that of the debtor or his duly authorized agent; and (4) that the act consisted of transferring, removing, destroying or concealing any of the debtor’s property, or permitting any of these acts to be done.”
    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.