Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 575 F.3d 1079 - Johnson v. Smith

Johnson v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

575 F.3d 1079 · 2009

Citation profile

35
cited by 35 later decisions
1
states following
August 2024
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently August 2024 · most notably Johnson v. Riebesell (2009), Chizzali v. Gindi (2011)

7 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions

310200920102020decided

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. § 349 · 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 28 U.S.C. § 1334 · 28 U.S.C. § 157 · 28 U.S.C. § 158 · 28 U.S.C. § 1927

Relies on Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp. · Chambers v. Nasco, Inc. · State v. Simpson · Budget Service Co. v. Better Homes of Virginia, Inc. · Smith v. Commercial Banking Corp.

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

  1. “is the central provision of the Bankruptcy Code”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “must have the power to compensate victims of violations of the automatic stay and punish the violators, even after the conclusion of the underlying bankruptcy case.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[A]n individual injured by any willful violation of a stay provided by this section shall recover actual damages, including costs and attorney's fees, and, in appropriate circumstances, may recover punitive damages.”
    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.