In Re Warner’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently May 2013
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005)
Relies on Hickman v. Taylor · Bonner v. City of Prichard · Upjohn Company v. United States · Clark v. United States · International Systems and Controls Corporation Securities Litigation Koenig v. International Systems and Controls Corporation Securities Litigation
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To invoke the fraud exception, the moving party must make a prima facie showing that the underlying transaction to which the communication relates is fraudulent.... “Prima facie” in this context means a showing, which if unrebutted, would result in a finding of fraud. (Citation omitted). Mere allegations or suspicions of fraud are not enough.”
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.