Bavelis v. Doukas’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate ·

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

1. “The distinction between core and non-core matters is fundamental to a bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction. This court has defined a core proceeding as one that “either invokes a substantive right created by federal bankruptcy law or one which could not exist outside of the bankruptcy.” Lowenbraun v. Canary (In re Lowenbraun), 453 F.3d 314, 320 (6th Cir.2006) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Waldman v. Stone, 698 F.3d 910, 917-22 (6th Cir.2012) (distinguishing between a bankruptcy court’s authority in core versus noncore proceedings). A nonexhaustive list of examples of what constitutes a core proceeding is set forth in 28 U.S.C. § 157 (b)(2). Noncore proceedings, in contrast, are those causes of action that (1) are not identified as a core proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 157 (b)(2), (2) existed prior to the filing of the bankruptcy case, (3) would continue to exist independent of the provisions of Title 11 of the United States Code, and (4) are not significantly affected as a result of the filing of the bankruptcy case. Duncan v. Deutsche Natl Bank Trust Co., No. 11-cv-2006, 2012 WL 4322667 , at (N.D.Ohio Sept. 20, 2012) (unpublished) (citing In re Walton, 104 B.R. 861, 864 (Bankr.S.D.Ohio 1988)).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Lewiston v. APTCAM, LLC (In re Lewiston)

2. “Congress has granted bankruptcy judges differing authority depending on whether the claim is “core” or “non-core.” 28 U.S.C. § 157 . In core proceedings, a bankruptcy judge “may enter appropriate orders and judgments” subject to appellate review by the district court. Id, § 157(b)(1). In noncore proceedings, on the other hand, the bankruptcy judge “shall submit proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law to the district court, and any final order or judgment shall be entered by the district judge after ,. .reviewing de novo” the objections of either party. Id. § 157(c)(1).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Reed v. Nathan