Dsc Ltd v. Dsc’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 30 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably General Electric Credit Equities, Inc. v. Brice Road Developments, L.L.C. (In Re Brice Road Developments, L.L.C.) (2008), Search Market Direct, Inc. v. Jubber (2009)
6 federal appellate · 30 district · 1 state decisions
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 Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · United States v. United States Gypsum Co. · Wiley v. United States · Liberles v. County of Cook · Nicholson v. Isaacman
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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“is clearly erroneous when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“'An abuse of discretion occurs only when the bankruptcy court relies upon clearly erroneous findings of fact or when it improperly applies the law or uses an erroneous legal standard.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“While § 303(c) allows joinder “before the case is dismissed or relief is ordered,” the Court agrees with the bankruptcy court’s holding that the statute “merely sets an absolute, outside limit on the time within which certain qualifying creditors may join an involuntary petition. It means that a would-be joining creditor must join, if at all, before the Court has dismissed an involuntary bankruptcy petition.” The statute does not prohibit a court from setting an earlier deadline, based upon its case management authority, in order to ensure orderly, fair, and efficient proceedings. This is especially true in the context of an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding, where the court is required to expedite such proceedings. Fed.R.Bank.P. 1013(a).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re DSC, Ltd.
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.