Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 91 F.1d 366 - In re Sievers

In re Sievers’s Empirical Analysis

91 F. 366 · 1899

Citation profile

31
cited by 31 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
January 1933
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 14 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 31 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 1933 · most notably Randolph v. Scruggs (1903), Pobreslo v. Joseph M. Boyd Co. (1933)

10 federal appellate · 14 district · 2 state decisions

12018991900191019201930decided

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 Mayer v. Hellman · Boese v. King · Reed v. McIntyre

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

  1. ““Sec. 23. (a) Tlie United States circuit courts shall have jurisdiction oí all controversies at law and in equity, as distinguished from proceedings in bankruptcy, between trustees as such and adverse claimants concerning the property acquired or claimed by the trustees, in the same manner and to the same extent only as though bankruptcy proceedings had not been instituted and such controversies had been between the bankrupts and such adverse claimants. (b) Suits by the trastee shall only be brought or prosecuted in the courts where the bankrupt, whose estate is being administered by such trustee, might have brought or prosecuted them if proceedings in bankruptcy had not been instituted, unless by consent of the proposed defendant, (c) The United States circuit courts shall have concurrent jurisdiction with the courts of bankruptcy, within their respective territorial limits, of the offenses enumerated in this act.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Nothing in this section contained shall be construed to deprive a court of bankruptcy of any power it would possess were certain specific powers not herein enumerated.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. ““In addition to this, it must he observed that the act itself is an administrative measure, enacted under a constitutional grant of power for the enforcing and collecting of the assets of an insolvent debtor and distributing them pro rata among his creditors; and the district court of the United Slates, as a court of bankruptcy, is the jurisdiction created for its administration. From this general consideration of the purposes of the act. and the jurisdiction generally and specifically conferred upon this court as a court of bankruptcy, as already pointed out, it appears that congress has directly, in terms, and by necessary implication conferred the requisite jurisdiction upon this court to entertain and determine any suits, at the instance of tlie trustee or otherwise, necessary for collecting, reducing to money, and distributing the estates of bankrupts, and for determining controversies in relation thereto, except such as are in this act otherwise provided for.””
    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.