In Re Marcus’s Empirical Analysis
1991
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 1306 · 11 U.S.C. § 1325 · 11 U.S.C. § 1327 · 11 U.S.C. § 348 · 11 U.S.C. § 522 · 11 U.S.C. § 541
Relies on Chevron Oil Co. v. Huson · Agency Holding Corp. v. Malley-Duff & Associates, Inc. · Armstrong v. Lindberg · Lindberg Armstrong v. A Lindberg · In Re Lennon
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Conversion of a case from a case under one chapter of this title to a case under another chapter of this title constitutes an order for relief under the chapter to which the case is converted, but, except as provided in subsections (b) and (c) of this section, does not effect a change in the date of the filing of the petition, the commencement of the case, or the order for relief.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Horton · In Re Mann“whether, when a debtor converts a case from a Chapter 13 to one under Chapter 7, the date of conversion determines the date for claiming exemptions or whether the date of the original filing of the Chapter 13 petition controls.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Marcus v. Zeman“logic dictates that the date of conversion [from Chapter 13 to Chapter 7] is the controlling date on which to determine ... property of the Chapter 7 estate”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Calder v. Job
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.