Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 583 BR 775 - In re Stewart

In re Stewart’s Empirical Analysis

2018

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
June 2019
most recently cited

1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 329 · 28 U.S.C. § 1334 · 28 U.S.C. § 1409 · 28 U.S.C. § 157

Relies on White v. General Motors Corp. · Downs v. Cooper / · Neben & Starrett, Inc. v. Chartwell Financial Corp. · Turner v. Davis, Gillenwater & Lynch · In Re Saturley

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

  1. “The law is clear that the failure to comply with § 329 and Rule 2016(b) constitute sufficient grounds, under appropriate circumstances, for the Court to exercise its inherent power and discretion to deny all fees and costs paid to Welch and to direct disgorgement of up to all fees and costs already received.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[a]n attorney who fails to comply with the requirement of § 329 forfeits any right to receive compensation for services rendered on behalf of the debtor ... and a court may order an attorney sua sponte to disgorge funds already paid to the attorney.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “failure to disclose the amount and source of his fees and expenses ... for over two years ... constitute[d] a clear violation of § 329 and Rule 2016(b).”
    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.