In Re Bowling’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently January 2012 · most notably Cheryl Bessette for Herself and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Avco Financial Services Inc (2000), Hardy v. United States ex rel. Internal Revenue Service (1996)
1 federal appellate · 2 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. § 105 · 11 U.S.C. § 524 · 11 U.S.C. § 525
Relies on In Re Gardner · Smurzynski v. General Finance Corp. (In Re Smurzynski) · In Re Barbour · Brown v. Pennsylvania State Employees Credit Union (In Re Brown)
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“• the agreement must be filed with the court; • the agreement itself must contain “a clear and conspicuous statement” advising the debtor that he may rescind the agreement within sixty days after it is filed or at any time prior to discharge; • if an attorney represented the debtor during negotiation of the agreement, the filed copy of the agreement must include a declaration by counsel that the agreement is “fully informed” and “voluntary,” that it does not impose an “undue hardship” on the debtor or his dependents, and that counsel advised the debtor of the legal effect and consequences of both the agreement and any default under that agreement; • if the debtor was not represented by counsel in the negotiation of the agreement, then the court must hold a hearing attended by the debtor and inform the debtor that he is not obliged to enter into a reaffirmation agreement and explain to the debtor the legal effect and consequences of both the agreement and any default thereunder; moreover, unless the debt is a consumer debt secured by real property, the court must review the agreement and find that it does not impose an undue hardship on the debtor or his dependents and that it is in the best interest of the debtor.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Turner
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.