In Re James

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “action taken” is not limited to creditors who took action prior to the bankruptcy filing
• concluding that “when ‘action taken’ is read in context with the remaining provisions of § 362(c)(3) its application is not limited to creditors that have taken action prior to the pendency of the current case”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re Bender
  E.D. New York· 2016-12-06· cited 19×
• In re Goodrich
  D. Vermont· 2018-07-20· cited 13×
• In re Smith
  D. Maine· 2017-08-18· cited 6×
• In Re Stanford
  E.D. Arkansas· 2007-08-03· cited 5×

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Lamie v. United States Trustee
  Supreme Court· 2004-01-26· cited 1,956×
• Wachovia Bank, National Ass'n v. Schmidt
  Supreme Court· 2006-01-17· cited 636×
• In Re Paschal
  E.D. North Carolina· 2006-01-06· cited 39×
• Wachovia Bank, National Association v. Daniel G. Schmidt III Priag LLC Dgs Investments, Inc.
  Fourth Circuit· 2004-11-01· cited 27×