In re Roach’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 1109 · 11 U.S.C. § 330 · 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 11 U.S.C. § 521 · 28 U.S.C. § 1334 · 28 U.S.C. § 157
Relies on United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc. · Harris v. Reed · Lamie v. United States Trustee · Pegram v. Herdrich · Keene Corp. v. United States
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.
“The Reswick panel noted that 'Congress could, and did, intend the consequences of repeat filings to be different, and potentially more severe, as the number of successive filings increase [sic].' [In re] Reswick , 446 B.R. [362] at 373 [ (9th Cir. BAP 2011) ] (internal quotation marks omitted). Contrary to what the Reswick panel implies, the majority view's interpretation of § 362(c)(3)(A) accomplishes that goal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Wood
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.