Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 71 BR 36 - Kellogg v. Chester

Kellogg v. Chester’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
January 2007
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently January 2007 · most notably Burd v. Walters (1989), Mountain America Credit Union v. Skinner (1990)

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

180198719902000decided

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. § 105 · 28 U.S.C. § 157

Relies on Northern Pipeline Construction Co. v. Marathon Pipe Line Co. · McComb v. Jacksonville Paper Co. · United States v. Rizzo · Continental Air Lines, Inc. v. Hillblom (In Re Continental Air Lines, Inc.) · Douglass v. First National Realty Corp.

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

  1. “(a) The court may issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title. No provision of this title providing for the raising of an issue by a party in interest shall be construed to preclude the court from, sua sponte, taking any action or making any determination necessary or appropriate to enforce or implement court orders or rules, or to prevent an abuse of process. 45 ".... 46 "(c) The ability of any district judge or other officer or employee of a district court to exercise any of the authority or responsibilities conferred upon the court under this title shall be determined by reference to the provisions relating to such judge, officer, or employee set forth in title 28. This subsection shall not be interpreted to exclude bankruptcy judges and other officers or employees appointed pursuant to chapter 6 of title 28 from its operation.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “§ 157 in its present form was enacted in response to Marathon and was designed to give bankruptcy judges the greatest possible powers in order to fulfill their functions under Title 11....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[W]hen a bankruptcy court uses civil contempt to enforce a proper order ... such power under [Marathon ] is also 'incidental to Congress' power to define the right that it has created.'”
    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.