Sanders v. City of Brady’s Empirical Analysis
936 F.2d 212 · 1991
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 16 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 65 later decisions — most recently September 2021 · most notably Miller v. J.D. Abrams Inc. (1998), 1993-1 Hillis Motors Inc v. Hawaii Automobile Dealers' Association (1993)
18 federal appellate · 16 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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. § 365 · 28 U.S.C. § 1334 · 28 U.S.C. § 1738
Relies on Grogan v. Garner · Allen v. McCurry · Migra v. Warren City School District Board of Education · Kremer v. Chemical Construction Corp. · Marrese v. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he only aspect of the bankruptcy proceeding over which the district courts and their bankruptcy units have exclusive jurisdiction is “the bankruptcy petition itself.” See In re Wood, 825 F.2d 90 , 92 (5th Cir.1987). In other matters arising in or related to title 11 cases, unless the Code provides otherwise, state courts have concurrent jurisdiction ... and bankruptcy courts are prohibit ed from relitigating these matters if the state courts have already resolved them”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“An arrangement confirmed by a bankruptcy court has the effect of a judgment rendered by a district court. Any attempt by the parties to relitigate any of the matters that were raised or could have been raised therein is barred under the doctrine of res judicata.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“This statute directs a federal court to refer to the preclusion law of the State in which judgment was rendered. “It has long been established that § 1738 does not allow federal courts to employ their own rules of res judicata in determining the effect of state judgments. Rather, it goes beyond the common law and commands a federal court to accept the rules chosen by the State from which the judgment is taken.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Garner v. Lehrer · Matter of Garner
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.