Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 91 F.2d 449 - Texas Co. v. Hauptman

Texas Co. v. Hauptman’s Empirical Analysis

91 F.2d 449 · 1937

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
February 1984
most recently cited

11 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently February 1984

11 federal appellate ·

80193719401950196019701980decided

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 Mueller v. Nugent · Isaacs v. Hobbs Tie & Timber Co. · Nashville St Ry v. Wallace · Straton v. New · Riehle v. Margolies

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

  1. ““The trustee’s motion to dismiss for want of jurisdiction presents the theory that since the Missouri Pacific is in bankruptcy only the court having jurisdiction of the bankruptcy proceeding, the district court for the Eastern District of Missouri, has jurisdiction of any such case as this brought against the trustee. The statute, 11 U.S.C.A. § 205 , sub. a, provides that during the pendency of a reorganization proceeding in bankruptcy the district court in which the .proceeding is pending shall ‘have exclusive jurisdiction of the debtor and its property wherever located.’ The contention that a declaratory judgment against the trustee would constitute interference with the court’s ‘jurisdiction of the debtor and its property’ cannot be successfully maintained. * * * “In no event, it seems to us, could a mere declaratory judgment against the trustee — and no more than that was or. could be sought by plaintiffs under the Missouri Declaratory Judgment Act — ■ involve any direct or immediate interference with ‘the debtor and its prop erty.’ Su'ch a judgment only could ‘declare rights, status, and other legal relations.’ * H? * ‘A declaratory judgment or decree is one which simply declares the rights of the parties or expresses the opinion of the court on a question of law, without ordering anything to be done; its distinctive characteristic being that the declaration stands by itself, and no executory process follows as of course; and the action therefor is distinguished from oth”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “the word 'property' is used, it may mean either the rights in a physical thing, or the physical thing itself, or both.”
    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.