Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 57 F.3d 627 - In the Matter of Robert Sheridan, Debtor-Appellee. Appeal of City National Bank of Florida

In the Matter of Robert Sheridan, Debtor-Appellee. Appeal of City National Bank of Florida’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

132
cited by 132 later decisions
September 2018
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 132 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Palmacci v. Umpierrez (1997), Constance Mercer At&t Universal Card Services v. Constance P Mercer (2001)

10 federal appellate · 1 district ·

500199520002010decided

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 · Grogan v. Garner · First National Bank v. Kimzey · New York Mercantile Exchange v. Leist · Meyer v. Rigdon

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

  1. “[t]o prevail on a false pretenses claim, the creditor must show that the debtor obtained the money “through representations which the debtor either knew to be false or made with such reckless disregard for the truth as to constitute willful misrepresentation.” In re Sheridan, 57 F.3d 627, 635 (7th Cir.1995) (citation omitted). The creditor must also prove that the debtor acted with an intent to deceive and that the creditor relied on the debtor’s misrepresentations. Id.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “An appellate reversal of a decision to limit an expert's testimony requires more than bare arguments that the expert is qualified and his testimony is relevant. Indeed the abuse of discretion standard requires the challenging party to show that 'no reasonable person would have agreed with the district court['s ruling].'”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[W]hen a creditor entrusts the debtor with money to use for a specific purpose and the debtor has no intention of using it in that manner, a misrepresentation exists upon which a debt can be held non-dischargeable.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.