Paul v. Monts’s Empirical Analysis
906 F.2d 1468 · 1990
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 14 district · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 102 later decisions — most recently August 2018 · most notably Ehrenhaus v. Reynolds (1992), Moothart v. Bell (1994)
23 federal appellate · 14 district · 6 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. § 1112 · 11 U.S.C. § 1127 · 11 U.S.C. § 1141 · 11 U.S.C. § 1142 · 11 U.S.C. § 541
Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Louisiana Public Service Commission v. Federal Communications Commission · Carstea v. Poplar Tree Homeowners Ass'n · In re Disbarment of Sacco · Mobil Alaska Pipeline Co. v. United States
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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) ... the provisions of a confirmed plan bind the debtor, any entity issuing securities under the plan, any entity acquiring property under the plan, and any creditor, equity security holder, or general partner in the debtor, whether or not the claim or interest of such creditor, equity security holder, or general partner is impaired under the plan and whether or not such creditor, equity security holder, or general partner has accepted the plan. (c) ... after confirmation of a plan, the property dealt with by the plan is free and clear of all claims and interests of creditors, equity security holders, and of general partners in the debtor.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“The trustee, as successor to the debtor in possession, is bound by his predecessor’s authorized actions. When asserting rights of action against another, the bankruptcy trustee has no greater rights than the debtor has. The trustee is ... subject to the same defenses as could have been asserted by the defendant had the action been instituted by the debtor.... He may not maintain a position regarding a transaction wholly inconsistent with his previous acts in connection with that same transaction.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'[W]here the moving party has the burden--the plaintiff on a claim for relief or the defendant on an affirmative defense--his showing must be sufficient for the court to hold that no reasonable trier of fact could find other than for the moving party.'”
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.