851 F. Supp. 515 - Friedlander v. Doherty’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 2018
2 federal appellate ·
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. § 348 · 11 U.S.C. § 524 · 11 U.S.C. § 553 · 28 U.S.C. § 2201 · 29 U.S.C. § 1001 (§ 2 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1056 (§ 206 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1109 (§ 409 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974) · 29 U.S.C. § 1132 (§ 502 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974)
Relies on Foman v. Davis · Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance v. Russell · Morton v. Mancari · Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc. · Andrijevic v. Kelleran
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.
“[C]laims arising after the filing of a Chapter 11 petition and before conversion to Chapter 7 are treated 'for all purposes' as claims arising pre-petition, unless they qualify as 'administrative expenses' under section 503(b).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Ludkowski“allow a breaching fiduciary to collect from the very fund he fraudulently depleted.”
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.