Commonwealth of Puerto Rico v. Commonwealth Oil Refining Co.’s Empirical Analysis
596 F.2d 1239 · 1979
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 148 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably Texaco Inc. v. Sanders (In Re Texaco Inc.) (1995), Landmark Capital Co. v. North Central Development Co. (In Re Landmark Capital Co.) (1982)
5 federal appellate · 3 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
Relies on Bank of the United States v. Deveaux · Freund v. United States · In re Bankers Trust · Continental Coal Corp. v. Roszelle Bros.
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 148 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) The proximity of creditors of every kind to the Court; (2) The proximity of the bankrupt (debt- or) to the Court; (3) The proximity of the witnesses necessary to the administration of the estate; (4) The location of the assets; (5) The economic administration of the estate; (6) The necessity for ancillary administration if bankruptcy should result.”
48 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“A bankruptcy court may transfer a case under title 11 or a proceeding arising under or related to such a case to a bankruptcy court for another district, in the interest of justice and for the convenience of the parties.”
9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) whether transfer would promote the economic and efficient administration of the bankruptcy estate; (2) whether the interests of judicial economy would be served by the transfer; (3) whether the parties would be able to receive a fair trial in each of the possible venues; (4) whether either forum has an interest in having the controversy decided within its borders; (5) whether the enforceability of any judgment would be affected by the transfer; and (6) whether the plaintiffs original choice of forum should be disturbed.”
3 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.