In the Matter of Jerome D Baker Appeal of Lasalle Bank Ni’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 2015 · most notably Moriarty v. Svec (1998), in Re: Fred Lowenschuss (1999)
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 541
Relies on Patterson v. Shumate · Guidry v. Sheet Metal Workers National Pension Fund · Bankr L Rep P 70653 in the Matter of Richard E Barker · Giardono v. Jones · Madonia v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Virginia
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“504 U.S. at 765, 112 S.Ct. at 2250. What is an”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[The bankruptcy judge] assumed that if [the debtor’s] plan was “ERISA-quali-fied” ... then the balance of [the debt- or’s] account is outside the bankruptcy estate given § 541(c)(2) and Patterson. It is not clear to us that this is so. Patterson holds that ERISA counts as “applicable nonbankruptcy law,” not that all the full balances in all ERISA-quali-fied plans are necessarily protected from creditors.... We do not read Patterson to say that money readily available to participants for current consumption necessarily is unavailable to repay debts.... But because the [creditor] does not argue, and the record does not suggest, that [the debtor] lawfully could have withdrawn any of the funds remaining in his account at the time the bankruptcy case began, we do not pursue the question.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re McBride“Although the Department of Labor has issued a regulation stating that a corporation’s sole owner is not an “employee” for the purpose of activating Subchapter I of ERISA, see 29 C.F.R. § 2510.3 — 3(c)(1), Baker was not Bakco’s sole equity investor; he owned 50.9 percent of its stock. What is more, several courts of appeal have held, properly in our view, that this regulation means only that a one-person corporation must use a Keogh plan rather than an ERISA plan for its solitary employee....”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.