Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 890 F.2d 1312 - In The Matter Of Evangeline Refining Company

In The Matter Of Evangeline Refining Company’s Empirical Analysis

890 F.2d 1312 · 1989

Citation profile

143
cited by 143 later decisions
3
states following
April 2022
most recently cited

23 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 143 later decisions — most recently April 2022 · most notably Boddy, In the Matter of Taxman Clothing Company Appeal of Arthur Winer Incorporated et al (1995)

23 federal appellate · 4 district · 3 state decisions

77019891990200020102020decided

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 Hensley v. Eckerhart · Johnson v. Georgia Highway Express, Inc. · Robertson v. Methow Valley Citizens Council · Trustees v. Greenough · Messenger v. Anderson

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

  1. “(a) After notice to any parties in interest and to the United States trustee and a hearing, and subject to sections 326, 328, and 329 of this title, the court may award ... to the debtor’s attorney— (1) reasonable compensation for actual, necessary services rendered by such ... [attorney] based on the nature, the extent, and the value of such services, the time spent on such services, and the cost of comparable services other than in a case under this title.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[F]or the law of the case doctrine to apply, “only a ‘final ruling’ will do....” 18 C. Wright, A. Miller & E. Cooper, Federal Practice and Procedure § 4478 (1981 & Supp.1989). Finality in this sense does not refer to technical concepts of finality but rather is a functional finality which “seeks to identify a determination intended to put a matter to rest.” Id. Interim fee awards are not final determinations intended to put a matter to rest. Rather, they are interlocutory and reviewable, and are intended only to provide some interim relief from the economic hardships of subsidizing litigation.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““A trustee, an examiner, a debtor’s attorney, or any professional person employed under section 327 or 1103 of this title may apply to the court not more than once every 120 days after an order for relief in a case under-this title, or more often if the court permits, for such compensation for services rendered before the date of such an application or reimbursement for expenses incurred before such date as is provided under section 330 of this title. After notice and a hearing, the court may allow and disburse to such applicant such compensation or reimbursement.””
    2 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.