green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
8.1 score
“proof by the preponderance of evidence means that it is sufficient to persuade the finder of fact that the proposition is more likely true than not. clear and convincing evidence is a higher standard requiring a high probability of success.”
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 25 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Kelley v. Locke (In Re Kelley)
proof by the preponderance of evidence means that it is sufficient to persuade the finder of fact that the proposition is more likely true than not. clear and convincing evidence is a higher standard requiring a high probability of success.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Sagewood Manor Associates Ltd. Partnership
“Proof by the preponderance of the evidence means that it is sufficient to persuade the finder of fact that the proposition is more likely true than not.” Id., at 654.
cited
Cited "see"
Farm Credit of Florida, ACA v. Sugarleaf Timber, LLC
See Arnold & Baker Farms v. United States (In re Arnold & Baker Farms), 85 F.3d 1415, 1421 (9th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1054 , 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see"
Verhoeven Ex Rel. Verhoeven v. Brunswick School Committee
See In re Arnold & Baker Farms, 85 F.3d 1415, 1419 (9th Cir.1996) (“Mootness is a jurisdictional issue which we review de novo.”), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1054 , 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997); F.E.R. v. Valdez, 58 F.3d 1530, 1532-33 (10th Cir.1995) (“We review the question of mootness de novo as a matter of federal jurisdiction.”).
discussed
Cited "see"
Boriski v. City of College Station
Co., 968 F.2d 427 , 430 (5th Cir.1992), aff'd, 511 U.S. 244 , 114 S.Ct. 1483 , 128 L.Ed.2d 229 (1994); accord Benningfield, 157 F.3d at 378 ; see Weller v. Citation Oil & Gas Corp., 84 F.3d 191 , 195 n. 7 (5th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1055 , 117 S.Ct. 682 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997); Robbins v. Fragrance Impressions Ltd., 952 F.Supp. 427, 433 (S.D.Tex.1996).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Benitez-Villafuerte
See Marine Shale Processors, Inc. v. U.S.E.P.A., 81 F.3d 1371, 1385 (5th Cir.1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1055 , 117 S.Ct. 682 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997).
cited
Cited "see"
Yates v. Cunningham
See id. at Ex. 11 (May 15, 1998, letter to the Court withdrawing Summit House rec *50 ommendation); Ex. 15 (Cunningham Aff. at $¶ 3<t). 4 .
cited
Cited "see"
Sunflower Racing, Inc. v. Mid-Continent Racing & Gaming Co. (In Re Sunflower Racing, Inc.)
See Arnold & Baker Farms v. United States (In re Arnold & Baker Farms), 85 F.Sd 1415, 1421 (9th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. , 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see"
National Mass Media Telecommunication Systems, Inc. v. Stanley (In re National Mass Media Telecommunication Systems, Inc.)
See Arnold & Baker Farms v. United States (In re Arnold & Baker), 85 F.3d 1415, 1419 (9th Cir.1996) (“Mootness is a jurisdictional issue which we review de novo.”), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see"
98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 6473, 98 Daily Journal D.A.R. 8983, 2 Cal. Bankr. Ct. Rep. 47 in Re National Mass Media Telecommunication Systems, Inc., Debtor. National Mass Media Telecommunication Systems, Inc. v. Linda Ekstrom Stanley, Trustee-Appellee
See Arnold & Baker Farms v. United States (In re Arnold & Baker), 85 F.3d 1415, 1419 (9th Cir.1996) ("Mootness is a jurisdictional issue which we review de novo."), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re: Lomitas Business Center, Ltd., Debtor, Anthony Aulisio, Jr., and the Anthony Aulisio, Jr., Trust v. Aegis Financial Group, Inc., and Charles W. Daff
See Arnold & Baker Farms v. United States (In re Arnold & Baker Farms), 85 F.3d 1415, 1419 (9th Cir.1996), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997). 4 AFFIRMED. 2 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument.
cited
Cited "see"
BC Brickyard Associates, Ltd. v. Ernst Home Center, Inc. (In Re Ernst Home Center, Inc.)
See In re Arnold & Baker Farms, 85 F.3d 1415, 1419 (9th Cir.1996), ce rt. denied, — U.S. —, 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997); In re Baker Drake, Inc., 35 F.3d 1348, 1351 (9th Cir.1994).
cited
Cited "see"
Lenihan v. Boeing Co.
See Weller v. Citation Oil & Gas Corp., 84 F.3d 191, 194 (5th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 682 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997); DeAngelis v. El Paso Mun.
discussed
Cited "see"
In Re Ambanc La Mesa Limited Partnership
See In re Arnold and Baker Farms, 177 B.R. 648 (9th Cir. BAP 1994), aff'd, 85 F.3d 1415 (9th Cir.1996), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997). 11 The eighth requirement provides that "with respect to each class of claims or interests-(A) such class has accepted the plan; or (B) such class is not impaired under the plan." 11 U.S.C. § 1129 (a)(8). 11 U.S.C. § 1129 (a)(8) is not satisfied because Liberty, an impaired class, objected. 12 Because 11 U.S.C. § 1129 (a)(8) is not met, the Plan must satisfy the cramdown provision, 11 U.S.C. § 1129 (b), to be confirmed.
cited
Cited "see"
Liberty National Enterprises v. Ambanc La Mesa Ltd. Partnership (In re Ambanc La Mesa Ltd. Partnership)
See In re Arnold and Baker Farms, 177 B.R. 648 (9th Cir. BAP 1994), aff'd, 85 F.3d 1415 (9th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In re Mirchou
See, e.g. , Arnold & Baker Farms v. United States (In re Arnold & Baker Farms) , 85 F.3d 1415 (9th Cir. 1996), cert. denied , 519 U.S. 1054 , 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997) (denying confirmation of plan where evidence did not support finding that replacement real property collateral provided indubitable equivalent of allowed secured claim).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In re Mohave Agrarian Grp., LLC
See, e.g. , Arnold & Baker Farms v. United States (In re Arnold & Baker Farms) , 85 F.3d 1415 (9th Cir. 1996), cert. denied , 519 U.S. 1054 , 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997) (denying confirmation of plan where evidence did not support finding that replacement real property collateral provided indubitable equivalent of allowed secured claim).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Fratello v. Archdiocese of New York
Dep’t of Prob., 115 F.3d 1068, 1075-76 (2d Cir. 1997), reaff’d after remand, 173 F.3d 120 (2d Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1003 , 120 S.Ct. 495 , 145 L.Ed.2d 382 (1999))); see also id. at 407 (citing Griffin v. Coughlin, 88 N.Y.2d 674, 683 , 649 N.Y.S.2d 903, 908 , 673 N.E.2d 98, 103 (1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1054 , 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997) (holding that the A.A. materials in the record "demonstrate[d] beyond peradventure that doctrinally and as actually practiced in the 12-step methodology, adherence to the A,A. fellowship entails engagement in religious activity …
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Independent Bankers Ass'n of America v. Farm Credit Administration
See, e.g., Republican Nat’l Comm. v. Federal Election Comm., 76 F.3d 400, 407 (D.C.Cir.1996), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 682 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997) (quotation omitted).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Williams v. Babbitt
Compare Chamber of Commerce v. Federal Election Com’n, 69 F.3d 600, 605 (D.C.Cir.1995) (declining to accord Chevron deference to a Federal Election Commission regulation because it would raise troubling constitutional questions) with Republican Nat’l Comm. v. Federal Election Comm’n, 76 F.3d 400, 409 (D.C.Cir.1996) (according Chevron deference because “we can easily resolve the [constitutional questions] through the application of controlling precedent”), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 682 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
97 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3982, 97 Daily Journal D.A.R. 6755 Thomas E. Williams Alaska Reindeer, Inc. Reindeer Herders Association, Inc. v. Bruce Babbitt, in His Capacity as the United States Secretary of the Interior Cesar Niles, in His Capacity as Juneau Area Director of the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs, Kawerak Reindeer Herders Assoc., Defendant-Intervenor-Appellee
Compare Chamber of Commerce v. Federal Election Com'n, 69 F.3d 600, 605 (D.C.Cir.1995) (declining to accord Chevron deference to a Federal Election Commission regulation because it would raise troubling constitutional questions) with Republican Nat'l Comm. v. Federal Election Comm'n, 76 F.3d 400, 409 (D.C.Cir.1996) (according Chevron deference because "we can easily resolve the [constitutional questions] through the application of controlling precedent"), cert. denied, --- U.S. ----, 117 S.Ct. 682 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997). 14 This reading of DeBartolo and Rust does not offend Chevron 's underl…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Rafaela Cortes-Irizarry v. Corporacin Insular De Seguros
See Coyne, 53 F.3d at 460 (explaining that “when the facts support plausible but conflicting inferences on a pivotal issue in the ease, the judge may not choose between those inferences at the summary judgment stage”); see also United States v. Kayne, 90 F.3d 7, 12 (1st Cir.1996) (stating that disagreements among experts are “properly the subject of searching cross-examination” at trial), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Official Unsecured Creditors' Committee of Spaulding Composites Co. (In Re Spaulding Composites Co.)
See also In re Arnold & Baker Farms, 85 F.3d 1415, 1419 (9th Cir.1996), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 681 , 136 L.Ed.2d 607 (1997) (appeal not moot if bankruptcy court can fashion effective relief on remand).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Marine Shale Processors, Inc.
v.
Environmental Protection Agency
v.
Environmental Protection Agency
No. 96-430.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 6, 1997.
Published
Citer courts: Ninth Circuit (1)
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.