green
Positive treatment
5.2 score
Treatment trajectory · 2017 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2017
2021
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
In re Devey
See In Matter of Motors Liquidation Co. , 829 F.3d 135 , 160 (2d Cir. 2016), cert. denied , --- U.S. ----, 137 S.Ct. 1813 , 197 L.Ed.2d 758 (2017) (Contingent claims are still claims under § 101(5), and claimants are entitled to adequate notice if the debtor knows of the claims.).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ex Parte Calvin Gary Walker
See Ex parte Walker, 489 S.W.3d 1, 14 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2016, pet. ref’d), cert. denied, 137 S.Ct. 1813 (2017) (affirming the trial court’s orders denying Walker a formal evidentiary hearing and habeas relief on double jeopardy grounds, and concluding that no exception to the dual sovereignty doctrine applied).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Old Market Group Holdings Corp.
See Johnson v. Home State Bank, 501 U.S. 78, 83 (1991) (“Congress intended . . . to adopt the broadest available definition of ‘claim.’”); see also Elliot v. GM LLC (In re Motors Liquidation Co.), 829 F.3d 135, 156 (2d Cir. 2016), cert denied, 137 S. Ct. 1813 (Even a right to payment contingent on future events is a claim under Section 101(5) if it “result[s] from pre‐petition conduct fairly giving rise to that contingent claim.”) (internal citation omitted).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
GENERAL MOTORS LLC
v.
Celestine ELLIOTT
v.
Celestine ELLIOTT
No. 16-764.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Apr 24, 2017.
Consideration, Took.
Cited by 8 opinions | Published
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Justice GORSUCH took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.