Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 87 B.R. 114 - In Re Hendricks

In Re Hendricks’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
October 2011
most recently cited

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently October 2011

301988199020002010decided

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. § 350 · 11 U.S.C. § 727 · 28 U.S.C. § 1334 · 28 U.S.C. § 157

Relies on Stark v. St. Mary's Hospital · Hughes Alonzo Robinson v. Tommy C. Mann, Trustee · Milando v. Perrone · Laczko v. Gentran, Inc. (In Re Laczko) · In Re Iannacone

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

  1. “What perplexes me is why the BAP did not address the applicability of § 726(a)(2)(C) of the Bankruptcy Code. That section allows a creditor to participate in a distribution from the estate even if the claim is tardily filed provided (1) the creditor did not have notice or actual knowledge of the case in time to file and (2) the claim is filed in time for distribution. Laczko was a no-asset case. The creditor, therefore, could have participated in any distribution.”
    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.