green
Positive treatment
2.3 score
Treatment trajectory · 1974 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1974
2000
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Signet Bank v. Wingo (In Re Wingo)
King, Collier on Bankruptcy § 523.09 (15th ed. 1989); see In the Matter of Moran, 456 F.2d 1030, 1031 (3d Cir.1972), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 872 , 93 S.Ct. 201 , 34 L.Ed.2d 123 , reh’g denied, 409 U.S. 1050 , 93 S.Ct. 534 , 34 L.Ed.2d 504 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see"
Allie v. Ionata
PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co. (2d Cir.), 700 F.2d 894 , cert. denied, (1983), 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 , ("[A] dismissal for failure to comply with the statute of limitations will operate as an adjudication on the merits, unless it is specifically stated to be without prejudice." Id. at 896); Nathan v. Rowan (6th Cir.1981), 651 F.2d 1223 ("A summary judgment on the basis of the defense of the statute of limitations is a judgment on the merits." Id. at 1226 ); Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., N.A. v. Randell (S.D.N.Y. 1979), 485 F. Supp. 39 ; Smith v. Russell Sage College (1981)…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Amsouth Financial Corp. v. Warner (In Re Warner)
See, e.g., In the Matter of Moran, 456 F.2d 1030 (3d Cir.1972), cert. denied 409 U.S. 872 , 93 S.Ct. 201 , 34 L.Ed.2d 123 , rehearing denied, 409 U.S. 1050 , 93 S.Ct. 534 , 34 L.Ed.2d 504 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Baldwin Technology Corp. v. Dahlgren International, Inc. (In Re Dahlgren International, Inc.)
Thompson Trucking, Inc. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc., 870 F.2d 1044, 1046 (5th Cir.), reh’g denied, 880 F.2d 818 (1989); Nilsen v. City of Moss Point, 701 F.2d 556, 562 (5th Cir.1983) (en banc) (citations omitted); see also Mathis v. Laird, 457 F.2d 926, 927 (5th Cir.) (highlighting that a “ruling” based on the limitations period is required), cer t. denied, 409 U.S. 871 , 93 S.Ct. 201 , 34 L.Ed.2d 122 (1972).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Liming
Further, "[t]he debtor's unsupported assertions of an honest intent will not overcome the natural inferences from admitted facts." 3 Collier p 523.09[b], at 523-62; see also In re Moran, 456 F.2d 1030, 1030-31 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 872 , 93 S.Ct. 201 , 34 L.Ed.2d 504 (1972); In re Monsch, 18 F.Supp. 913, 915 (E.D.Ky.1937).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Central National Bank & Trust Co. v. Liming
Further, “[t]he debtor’s unsupported assertions of an honest intent will not overcome the natural inferences from admitted facts.” 3 Collier 11523.09[5][b], at 523-62; see also In re Moran, 456 F.2d 1030, 1030-31 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 409 U.S. 872 , 93 S.Ct. 201 , 34 L.Ed.2d 504 (1972); In re Monsch, 18 F.Supp. 913, 915 (E.D.Ky.1937).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Mathis
v.
Laird, Secretary of Defense
v.
Laird, Secretary of Defense
No. 71-6870.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 10, 1972.
Cited by 2 opinions | Published
C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.