Compton Sa Sanchez Ramos v. R Compton Sa’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 4 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently September 2015 · most notably Bercier v. L Bercier, GAC Enterprises, Inc. v. Medaglia (1995)
2 federal appellate · 4 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. § 523
Relies on City of New York v. New York, New Haven & Hartford Railroad · Reliable Electric Co. v. Olson Construction Co. · Byrd v. Alton · Brady v. Andrew · Neeley v. Murchison
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“furthers the bankruptcy policy of affording a 'fresh start' to the [individual] debtor”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Rule 4007 ... places a heavy burden on the creditor to protect his rights.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“As noted above, Debtors listed a Mr. and Mrs. Sanchez on their schedules. However, the notice sent did not reach the Creditors because the Debtors listed an incorrect address.... The fact that a debt is improperly scheduled does not necessarily create a right to file a complaint against discharge late, as [In re ] Adams, [ 734 F.2d 1094 (5th Cir.1984)] supra, implies, where a creditor has actual knowledge of the proceedings, the debt may still be dischargeable. See also In re Frankina, 29 B.R. 983, 985 (Bankr.E.D.Mich.1983) (“The [Plaintiffs’] contention that the mere failure of the debtor to list their proper address in the schedules gives them the right to file a late complaint is without merit”.) ... Precedent in case law also upholds a finding that notice of bankruptcy proceedings received in time to act prior to the filing deadlines, without formal notice of filing deadlines, constitutes sufficient notice — even in cases alleging fraud. Although there is a dearth of case law directly on this point in the Fifth Circuit, at least one case, Neeley v. Murchison, is apposite. 815 F.2d 345 (5th Cir.1987)....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Hill
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.