in Re Samuel William Sax Appeal of’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 10 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 81 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably In the Matter Of: Unr Industries, Inc., Debtors. Appeals of Unarco Bloomington Factory Workers (1994), In re Continental Airlines (1996)
3 federal appellate · 10 district · 3 state decisions
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 United States v. United Mine Workers of America · Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Wetzel · Cash Currency Exchange, Inc. v. Shine · Riggsby Suburban Bank of Cary Grove v. W Riggsby · Bankr L Rep P 70653 in the Matter of Richard E Barker
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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[The appellant] essentially has asked us to create an exception such that a stay is required to challenge a § 363(b) authorized sale except when the appellant argues that the property did not belong to the debtor’s estate. To create such an exception would seriously undermine the purpose of § 363(m) and could destroy the rule altogether [....] Finality is important because it minimizes the chance that purchasers will be dragged into endless rounds of litigation to determine who has what rights in the property. Without the degree of finality provided by the stay requirement, purchasers are likely to demand a steep discount for investing in property.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“essentially has asked us to create an exception such that a stay is required to challenge a § 363(b) authorized sale except when the appellant argues that the property did not belong to the debtor's estate. To create such an exception would seriously undermine the purpose of § 363(m) and could destroy the rule altogether.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an appeal of a bankruptcy sale is moot if the stay required by [section] 363(m) is not obtained.”
3 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.