· 5/29/1998
Sullivan v. Hall (In Re Hall)
Citations
- 222 B.R. 275
- 1998 Bankr. LEXIS 821
- 1998 WL 388986
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- arguing that Henderson Court’s discussion of Rule 4(m) is mere “dicta” and that Mendez court’s interpretation “remains binding precedent in this circuit”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Martin, Bostetter
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.