Skip to main content
Supreme Court· 1/14/2021

Chicago v. Fulton

Citations

  • 592 U.S. 154

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • explaining that the “canon against surplusage . . . strong[ly]” disfavors “interpretation[s] [that] would render superfluous another part of the same statutory scheme” (citation omitted)
  • finding no stay violation under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3) because mere retention of estate property does not constitute an act to exercise control
  • rejecting “an interpretation [that] would render superfluous another part of the same statutory scheme” (citation omitted)
  • “The canon against surplusage is strongest when an interpretation would render superfluous another part of the same statutory scheme.”
  • the automatic stay 10 “benefits creditors as a group by preventing individual creditors from pursuing their own interests 11 to the detriment of the others”
  • “The canon against surplusage is strongest when an interpretation would render superfluous another part of the same statutory scheme.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Samuel Alito

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.