Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 760 F.3d 1038 - Deitz v. Ford

Deitz v. Ford’s Empirical Analysis

760 F.3d 1038 · 2014

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
February 2018
most recently cited

1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 502 · 28 U.S.C. § 1334 · 28 U.S.C. § 1367 · 28 U.S.C. § 137 · 28 U.S.C. § 157 · 28 U.S.C. § 158

Relies on Crowell v. Benson · Thomas v. Union Carbide Agricultural Products Co. · Katchen v. Landy · Louisville Joint Stock Land Bank v. Radford · Turner v. Rogers

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

  1. “Congress clearly envisioned that bankruptcy courts would hear and determine all core proceedings, 28 U.S.C. § 157 (b)(1), which include, as relevant' here, “determinations as to the dis-chargeability of particular debts.” 28 U.S.C. § 157 (b)(2)(I). The Supreme Court has never held that bankruptcy courts are without constitutional authority to hear and finally determine whether a debt is dischargeable in bankruptcy. In fact, the Supreme Court’s decision in Stem clearly implied that bankruptcy courts have such authority when it concluded that bankruptcy courts had-the constitutional authority to decide even state law counterclaims to filed proofs of claim if the counterclaim would necessarily be decided through the claims allowance process. Stern, 131 S.Ct. at 2618 .”
    2 later decisions 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.