Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 613 F.3d 810 - Burival v. Roehrich

Burival v. Roehrich’s Empirical Analysis

613 F.3d 810 · 2010

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
January 2018
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 102 · 11 U.S.C. § 365 · 11 U.S.C. § 503 · 28 U.S.C. § 158

Relies on Lamie v. United States Trustee · In Re: Koenig Sporting Goods, Inc. · Great Western Saving Bank v. Orvco, Inc. (In Re Orvco, Inc.) · Towers v. Chickering & Gregory · HA-LO Industries, Inc. v. CenterPoint Properties Trust

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

  1. “[t]he trustee shall timely perform all of the [lease] obligations of the debtor ... first arising from or after 60 days after the order for relief in a case under chapter 11 of this title under an unexpired lease of personal property ... until such lease is assumed or rejected notwithstanding section 503(b)(1) of this title, unless the court, after a notice and a hearing and based on the equities of the case, orders otherwise with respect to the obligations or timely performance thereof.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the actual, necessary costs and expenses of preserving the estate including— (i) wages, salaries, and commissions for services rendered after the commencement of the case; and (ii) wages and benefits awarded pursuant to a judicial proceeding or a proceeding of the National Labor Relations Board as back pay attributable to any period of time occurring after commencement of the case under this title, as a result of a violation of Federal or State law by the debtor, without regard to the time of the occurrence of unlawful conduct on which such award is based or to whether any services were rendered, if the court determines that payment of wages and benefits by reason of the operation of this clause will not substantially increase the probability of layoff or termination of current employees, or of nonpayment of domestic support obligations, during the case under this title.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “To the contrary, § 365(d)(3) claims have priority status. Section 365(d)(3) expressly preempts subsection 503(b)(1), but not the introductory authorization of “administrative expenses” in § 503(b). The administrative expenses listed in the subsections of § 503(b) — preceded by “including” — are not exclusive. See 11 U.S.C. § 102 (3) (in the bankruptcy code, “including” is not limiting). Because § 365(d)(3) claims have a status at least equal to a claim under subsection 503(b)(1), the BAP correctly approved Pritchett’s claim as an administrative expense. In re Pacific-Atlantic Trading Co., 27 F.3d [401] at 405 [(9th Cir.1994) ].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.