Richardson v. Edwards’s Empirical Analysis
127 F.3d 97 · 1997
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently May 2025 · most notably Stichting Ter Behartiging Van de Belangen Van Oudaandeelhouders In Het Kapitaal Van Saybolt International B.V. v. Schreiber (2005), United States v. Microsoft Corp. (1998)
14 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 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. § 523 · 26 U.S.C. § 71
Relies on Bennett v. Spear · United States v. ITT Continental Baking Co. · Long v. Calhoun · Harrell v. Sharp · Gianakas v. Gianakas
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Supreme Court has warned against searching “for the ‘purpose’ of a consent decree” and then construing it in that light. [United States v.] ITT Continental Baking [Co.], 420 U.S. [223,] 235, 95 S.Ct. [926,] 933[, 43 L.Ed.2d 148 (1975) ]. The decree must be construed “as it is written.” Id. at 238 , 95 S.Ct. at 935 [, 43 L.Ed.2d 148 ]. Ordinary “aids of construction,” such as the circumstances surrounding the formation of the consent order, may be consulted. Id. at 238 & n. 11, 95 S.Ct. at 935 & n. 11[, 43 L.Ed.2d 148 ], But ultimately the question for the lower court, when it inter prets a consent decree incorporating a settlement agreement, is what a reasonable person in the position of the parties would have thought the language meant.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) A discharge under section 727 ... of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt— (5) to a ... child of the debtor, for ... support of such ... child, in connection with a separation agreement, divorce decree or other order of a court of record, determination made in accordance with State ... law by a governmental unit, or property settlement agreement, but not to the extent that— (B) such debt includes a liability designated as ... support, unless such liability is actually in the nature of ... support.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“will not entertain [an objection under Rule 17(a)] because Richardson failed to raise it in the bankruptcy court. ... To wait until the case reaches the court of appeals is to waive the objection.”
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.