Vance Valley Bank v. R Vance F Ld’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently June 2018 · most notably Sulmeyer v. Suzuki (1994), Long v. Joe Romania Chevrolet, Inc. (In Re Loken) (1994)
3 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 Waldschmidt v. Ford Motor Credit Co. (In Re Murray) · Exchange Bank of Polk County v. Christian (In Re Christian) · Gower v. Ford Motor Credit Co. (In Re Davis) · Knauer v. Enlow (In Re Enlow) · Valley Bank v. Vance (In Re Vance)
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) to the extent that such transfer was— (A) intended by the debtor and the creditor to or for whose benefit such transfer was made to be a contemporaneous exchange for new value given to the debtor; and (B) in fact a substantially contemporaneous exchange.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) to or for the benefit of a creditor; (2) for or on account of an antecedent debt owed by the debtor before such transfer was made; (3) made while the debtor was insolvent; (4) made— (A) on or within 90 days before the date of the filing of the petition ...; (5) that enables such creditor to receive more than such creditor would receive if— (A) the case were a case under Chapter 7 of this title; (B) the transfer had not been made; and •(C) such creditor received payment of such debt to the extent provided by the provisions of this title.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(3) of a security interest in property acquired by the debtor— (A) to the extent such security interest secures new value that was— (i) given at or after the signing of a security agreement that contains a description of such property as collateral; (ii) given by or on behalf of the secured party under such agreement; (iii) given to enable the debtor to acquire such property; and (iv) in fact used by the debtor to acquire such property; and (B) that is perfected before ten days after such security interest attaches; (emphasis added).”
6 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.