E.D. New York· 4/17/2014
Desiderio v. Parikh (In re Parikh)
Citations
- 508 B.R. 572
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- finding that counsel's failure to review prior petitions to ensure accuracy of disclosures in new petitions constituted sanctionable conduct
- stating that subsections 707(b)(4)(C) and (D) should be read in conjunction with subsections 707(b)(4)(A) and (B)
- declaring that 9011(c)(1)(A) exception to the safe harbor provision applies to bankruptcy petition and schedules
- finding that judgment denying discharge mooted contempt sanctions for failure to provide documents under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2004
- declaring that Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9011(c)(1)(A) exception to the safe harbor provision applies to bankruptcy petition and schedules
- “Sanctions under § 105, § 1927, and the Court’s inherent power all require bad faith, and the bad faith analysis under each is generally the same requiring clear and specific findings of bad faith.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Grossman, Hon
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
11 cases in this archive cite this case.
- In re TaborN.D. Illinois· 2018-04-11· cited 52×
- Gordon v. Tese-Milner (In re Gordon)S.D. New York· 2017-08-17· cited 29×
- In re BeinhauerE.D. New York· 2017-04-13· cited 28×
- In re BelmonteE.D. New York· 2015-01-28· cited 16×
- Casamatta v. Resurgent Capital Services, L.P. (In re Freeman-Clay)W.D. Missouri· 2017-09-01· cited 12×
- In re GrassoE.D. Pennsylvania· 2018-06-15· cited 10×
- In re MJS Las Croabas Properties, Inc.D. Puerto Rico· 2015-03-13· cited 5×
- In re BonillaD. Puerto Rico· 2017-07-25· cited 4×
- In re FazzaryM.D. Florida· 2015-05-21· cited 3×
- In re LernerE.D. New York· 2014-08-28· cited 2×
- In re RomanD. Puerto Rico· 2017-07-25
Cites
40 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court· 1990-06-11· cited 4,510×
- City of New York v. Eastway Construction Corp.Supreme Court· 1987-10-19· cited 540×
- Eastway Construction Corp. v. City of New YorkSecond Circuit· 1985-05-21· cited 405×
- Oliveri v. ThompsonSecond Circuit· 1986-10-15· cited 294×
- Moseley v. v. Secret Catalogue, Inc.Supreme Court· 2003-03-04· cited 197×
- George Hadges, William M. Kunstler v. Yonkers Racing Corp.Second Circuit· 1995-03-02· cited 178×
- In the Matter of Cohoes Industrial Terminal, Inc., Debtor. Leon C. Baker, Cross-Appellee v. Latham Sparrowbush Associates, Cross-AppellantSecond Circuit· 1991-05-01· cited 171×
- Wolters Kluwer Financial Services, Inc. v. ScivantageSecond Circuit· 2009-04-21· cited 155×
- United States v. Marion Seltzer, Esq., Vaughn Rosario, A/K/A Vaughn MichaelsSecond Circuit· 2000-09-25· cited 135×
- In Re Pennie & Edmonds LLPSecond Circuit· 2003-03-14· cited 134×
- Ipcon Collections LLC v. Costco Wholesale Corp.Second Circuit· 2012-10-09· cited 132×
- Nabisco, Inc. v. PF Brands, Inc.Second Circuit· 1999-08-31· cited 130×
- In Re Roger NovakEleventh Circuit· 1991-06-07· cited 63×
- Johnny Wilder, Susan Chana Lask v. Gl Bus Lines, International Bus Services, Inc., and Transport Workers Union of America, Local 225Second Circuit· 2001-07-26· cited 43×
- In Re Enron Corp.S.D. New York· 2002-08-15· cited 40×
- Huber v. Marine Midland BankSecond Circuit· 1995-03-15· cited 39×
- Dignity Health v. Seare (In re Seare)D. Nevada· 2013-04-09· cited 32×
- In Re OBrienW.D. Michigan· 2011-01-04· cited 29×
- First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. BrownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York· 1980-12-23· cited 29×
- Lafayette v. Collins (In Re Withrow)First Circuit· 2009-05-26· cited 27×
Other cases named Desiderio v. Parikh (In re Parikh)
1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.
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.