In Re Irwin’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 105 · 11 U.S.C. § 1109 · 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 11 U.S.C. § 523 · 11 U.S.C. § 541 · 11 U.S.C. § 544 · 11 U.S.C. § 546
Relies on Hansberry v. Lee · Taylor v. Sturgell · A.H. Robins Co. v. Piccinin · Maritime Electric Co. v. United Jersey Bank · Holtkamp v. Littlefield
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Supreme Court has cautioned that an alignment of interests, by itself, is not enough to warrant the application of collateral estoppel to a nonparty to the prior litigation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.