In re Payton

How courts have described this case

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

• “Both usage and dictionary definitions, then, demonstrate ... there is no single meaning that can be assigned to ‘following’ in a modifying phrase.”
• “In this context, causation is the focus of the relationship, not simply chronology.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re Gibas
  E.D. Wisconsin· 2016-01-19· cited 12×
• In re Guerrero
  S.D. Texas· 2015-09-09· cited 9×
• Bruce A. Ruth & Dawn Conversions, Inc. v. Swigert (In re Swigert)
  M.D. Pennsylvania· 2019-04-01· cited 5×
• In re Gill
  W.D. Oklahoma· 2018-01-22· cited 4×
• In re Alan
  W.D. Michigan· 2015-06-23

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Mass.
  Supreme Court· 2007-02-21· cited 843×
• Andersson v. Security Federal Savings & Loan (In Re Andersson)
  Sixth Circuit· 1997-06-13· cited 38×
• United States v. Yellin (In Re Weinstein)
  First Circuit· 2001-11-30· cited 34×
• In Re Richardson
  M.D. Louisiana· 1998-02-04· cited 25×
• In Re First Assured Warranty Corp.
  D. Colorado· 2008-03-06· cited 22×
• Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. Elston Self Service Wholesale Groceries, Inc.
  Seventh Circuit· 2009-03-12· cited 14×
• In Re Stuart
  S.D. Georgia· 2003-07-31· cited 12×
• Grossman v. Beal (In Re Beal)
  E.D. Wisconsin· 2006-07-28· cited 12×
• In Re Munkwitz
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1999-05-14· cited 10×
• In Re Durham
  D. Massachusetts· 2011-10-25· cited 9×
• Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. Elston Self Service Wholesale Groceries, Inc.
  N.D. Illinois· 2008-03-13· cited 5×
• In Re Riekena
  C.D. Illinois· 2011-09-15· cited 4×