Rajala v. Gardner’s Empirical Analysis
709 F.3d 1031 · 2013
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 28 U.S.C. § 1291 · 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 28 U.S.C. § 158
Relies on United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc. · County of Los Angeles v. Davis · Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. MacKey · Trw Inc v. Adelaide Andrews · North Georgia Finishing, Inc. v. Di-Chem, Inc.
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he district court's order, which deemed § 362 inapplicable to the judgment proceeds, was essentially an order granting relief from the automatic stay.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the equivalent of a decision ... on a motion seeking relief from a stay”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“literal application of a statute will produce a result demonstrably at odds with the intention of its drafters.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Cashco, Inc.
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.