In Re Murphy

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that an order issued pursuant to § 362(j)\does not provide for a declaration of any individual creditor's rights\
• “Because confirmation of a chapter 13 plan will ‘bind each creditor’ it follows that termination of the automatic stay as to all creditors under Section 362(c
• “Because termination of the stay under Section 362(c) is not the equivalent of termination of the Chapter 13 case, it is still possible for a debtor to confirm a Chapter 13 plan when the stay terminates early in the case under Section 362.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In Re Murray
  S.D. Ohio· 2006-09-13· cited 23×
• In Re Furlong
  C.D. Illinois· 2010-03-19· cited 14×
• Banco Cooperativo de P.R. v. Herrera (In re Herrera)
  First Circuit· 2018-10-03· cited 7×
• In Re Dienberg
  N.D. Indiana· 2006-08-30· cited 6×
• In re Smith
  E.D. Tennessee· 2019-02-01· cited 2×

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• In Re Simons
  W.D. Texas· 1990-04-30· cited 26×
• Green Tree Financial Corp. v. Garrett (In Re Garrett)
  N.D. Alabama· 1995-07-31· cited 18×
• In Re Gurst
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1987-06-30· cited 14×
• In Re Parker
  S.D. New York· 2006-01-04· cited 9×
• In Re Sullivan
  M.D. Florida· 2005-01-14· cited 7×