Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 462 BR 651 - In re Rice

In re Rice’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
August 2017
most recently cited

1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 361 · 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 11 U.S.C. § 502 · 28 U.S.C. § 158

Relies on Butner v. United States · Kokoszka v. Belford · Midland Asphalt Corp. v. United States · 26 1673 74636 James Wilson Associates Metropolitan Life Insurance Company · Kapp v. Naturelle, 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Generally, the real party in interest under § 362(d) is the one who, under applicable substantive law, has the legal right which is sought to be enforced or is the party entitled to bring suit.... The determination of whether a party is a “party in interest” for purposes of § 362(d) must be determined on a case-by-case basis, with reference to the interest asserted and how that interest is affected by the automatic stay.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. In Re Lee

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.