2 canonical passages across 2 cases, quoted by 7 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from In Re Samuel Duke Cardelucci, Debtor. Willem Onink, Marsha Onink v. Samuel Duke Cardelucci.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | In Re Samuel Duke Cardelucci, Debtor. Willem Onink, Marsha Onink v. Samuel Duke Cardelucci Anchor | green | “this court is not bound by a bap decision” | 4 |
| 2 | State Compensation Insurance Fund v. Zamora (In Re Silverman) | green | “we treat the bap's decisions as persuasive authority given its special expertise in bankruptcy issues” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.