Mullarkey v. Tamboer’s Empirical Analysis

536 F.3d 215 · 2008

Citation profile

107

cited by 107 later decisions

January 2025

most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 18 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 107 later decisions — most recently January 2025 · most notably Duhaney v. Attorney General of United States (2010), Davis v. Wells Fargo, U.S. (2016)

5 federal appellate · 18 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. § 362 · 18 U.S.C. § 1964 (§ 901 of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 157 · 28 U.S.C. § 158

Relies on Parklane Hosiery Co. v. Shore · Johnson v. Righetti · Southland Corp. v. United States · Laborers' International Union v. Foster Wheeler Corp. · United States v. Pelullo

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

“(1) a final judgment on the merits in a prior suit involving (2) the same parties or their privies and (3) a subsequent suit based on the same cause of action.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Family Civil Liberties Union v. State · Phinisee v. Friewald
“(1) the issue to be precluded is identical to the issue decided in the prior proceeding; (2) the issue was actually litigated in the prior proceeding; (3) ■ the court in the prior proceeding issued a final judgment on the merits; (4) the determination of the issue was essential to the prior judgment; and (5) the party against whom the doctxine is asserted was a party to or in privity with a party to the earlier proceeding.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. In re GEO Specialty Chemicals Ltd. · Albanes v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA (In re Albanes)
“(1) core proceedings arising under title 11; and (2) non-core proceedings that are otherwise related to a case under title 11.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
e.g. Kevin O'Halloran, in His Capacity for Island View Crossing Ii, L.P. v. Prudential Sav. Bank (In re Island View Crossing Ii, L.P.) · Goldstein v. Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB (In re Universal Marketing, Inc.)

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.