Krensky v. Wolfe’s Empirical Analysis
88 F.2d 257 · 1937
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently January 2012
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Isaacs v. Hobbs Tie & Timber Co. · May v. Henderson · Gross v. Irving Trust Co. · Duparquet Huot & Moneuse Co. v. Evans · Tennessee Pub Co v. American Nat Bank
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.
““‘Nevertheless, due regard for comity —which means, in this connection, no more than judicial courtesy between the courts undertaking to deal with the same matter —would suggest that ordinarily the trustee in bankruptcy might well be instructed by the bankruptcy court, before taking final action, to request the state court to recognize the exclusive jurisdiction of the former and set aside any orders already made conflicting therewith, as was done with good results in the case of In re Diamond’s Estate, supra (C.C.A.) 259 F. 70, 72, 75 . In the present case, however, such a course would probably have been futile, in view of the fixed attitude of the state courts on the subject.’ * * *”
1 later decision 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.