In Re Pierce’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 2006
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 105 · 11 U.S.C. § 327 · 11 U.S.C. § 503 · 11 U.S.C. § 545
Relies on Yermakov v. Fitzsimmons · In Re Leisure Dynamics, Inc. · Blazek v. North American Life & Casualty Co. · Village of New Brighton v. Jamison · Matter of Lewis
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“means person that-- 36 (A) is not a creditor, an equity security holder, or an insider; 37 * * * 38 * * * 39 (E) does not have an interest materially adverse to the interest of the estate or of any class of creditors or equity security holders, by reason of any direct or indirect relationship to, connection with, or interest in, the debtor * * *[.] 40 11 U.S.C. Secs. 101(13)(A), (E) (emphasis added). Specifically, the court held that McEwen was not disinterested because”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[h]e was a prepetition creditor of these estates, and he held a mortgage on the Debtors' real property to secure payment of prepetition and post-petition services.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“in an untenable position adverse to both the Debtors and other interests in the cases.”
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.