In Re Hoffman’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently October 2016
4 district · 1 state decisions
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. § 362 · 11 U.S.C. § 363 · 11 U.S.C. § 506 · 11 U.S.C. § 525 · 11 U.S.C. § 541 · 28 U.S.C. § 158
Relies on Hines v. Davidowitz · Perez. v. Campbell · Radzanower v. Touche Ross & Co. · Yazoo County Industrial Development Corp. Et Al. v. Suthoff Et Al. · Missouri v. United States Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In order to fall within the exception, the primary purpose of the state proceeding must be the conservation of the public safety, health, or welfare. The exemption will not lie if the objective of a given state law is the solvency of the public fisc or, put another way, the protection of a state’s pecuniary interest in property-”
1 later decision 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.