Abramowitz Dds v. Palmer’s Empirical Analysis
999 F.2d 1274 · 1993
Citation profile
26 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 100 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably Zale Corporation Feld v. Zale Corporation (1995), McFarland v. Leyh (1995)
26 federal appellate · 6 district ·
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 Mahan & Rowsey, Inc. v. Oklahoma Natural Gas · Taylor v. Freeland & Kronz · Pacor Inc. v. Higgins · A.H. Robins Co. v. Piccinin · McCarty Ranch Trust v. Craig
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 100 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the outcome of that proceeding could conceivably have any effect on the estate being administered in bankruptcy.... An action is related to bankruptcy if the outcome could alter the debtor’s rights, liabilities, options or freedom of action ... and which in any way impacts upon the handling and administration of the bankrupt estate.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“arising under title 11, or arising in or related to cases under title 11.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Ms. Palmer asserts ... that because the bankruptcy trustee failed to object to the exemption of the home from the bankruptcy proceedings the home effectively “fell out” of the estate. We agree. In Taylor v. Freeland & Kronz, 503 U.S. 638 , 112 S.Ct. 1644 , 118 L.Ed.2d 280 (1992), the Supreme Court held that failure to object to a debtor’s claim of exemption within the 30-day time limit prescribed by Bankruptcy Rule 4003(b) precludes the trustees and creditors from challenging the exemption of that property after the 30 days have expired. In this case, Dr. Palmer claimed the Missouri home as exempt and thus it did not remain part of the bankruptcy estate for distribution as neither the trustee nor any creditor filed an objection. We agree that the trustee is now precluded from including the Missouri home in Dr. Palmer’s bankruptcy estate.”
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.