Cutright v. United States
Marvin D. CUTRIGHT v. UNITED STATES
Cutright v. United States, 506 U.S. 821 (1992)
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Denied.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 7 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(noting division in judicial interpretation but following expansive reading of § 506(c))
-
("[T]hou shalt not classify similar claims differently in order to gerrymander an affirmative vote on a reorganization plan.")
-
(day of alleged unlawful arrest was the day of accrual of plaintiffs claims contrary to plaintiffs contention that his claims accrued on the date of his arraignment)
-
(Purpose of equivalency requirement ensures that “equity holders will not eviscerate the absolute priority rule by means of gratuitous, token cash infusions proposed primarily to ‘buy’ cheap financing.”)
-
(“Classification of claims ... affects the integrity of the voting process, for, if claims could be arbitrarily placed in separate classes, it would almost always be possible for the debtor to manipulate ‘acceptance’ by artful classification.”)
Cited by 126 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.