Gamble v. Gamble’s Empirical Analysis
143 F.3d 223 · 1998
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 61 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Pro-Snax Distributors Inc Andrews Kurth Llp v. Family Snacks Inc (1998), In the Matter of Kelly Dennis v. Kelly Dennis and Gulf South Title Corporation
9 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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
Relies on United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc. · BFP v. Resolution Trust Corporation · Hill v. Hill (In Re Hill) · Jodoin v. Samayoa (In Re Jodoin) · Realty Portfolio, Inc. v. Hamilton
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 61 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt— (15) not of the kind described in paragraph (5) that is incurred by the debtor in the course of a divorce or separation or in connection with a separation agreement, divorce decree or other order of a court of record, a determination made in accordance with State or territorial law by a governmental unit unless'— (A) the debtor does not have the ability to pay such debt from income or property of the debtor not reasonably necessary to be expended for the maintenance or support of the debtor or a dependent of the debtor and, if the debtor is engaged in a business, for the payment of expenditures necessary for the continuation, preservation, and operation of such business; or (B) discharging such debt would result in a benefit to the debtor that outweighs the detrimental consequences to a spouse, former spouse, or child of the debtor;”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(a) A discharge under section 727 ... does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt— (15) [not in the nature of alimony or child support as exempted under § 523(a)(5) ] that is incurred by the debtor in the course of a divorce or separation or in connection with a separation agreement [or] divorce decree ... unless— (A) the debtor does not have the ability to pay such debt from income or property of the debtor not reasonably necessary to be expended for the maintenance or support of the debtor or a dependent of the debtor ... or (B) discharging such debt would result in a benefit to the debtor that outweighs the detrimental consequences to a spouse....”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“joint” to describe the debts at issue, it did not hold that — or even consider whether' — a debt must arise out of a community obligation to be nondis-chargeable pursuant to Section 523(a)(15). Id. at 881-88 . To the contrary, the Cross-white court emphasized that Congress enacted the provision "to broaden the types of marital debts that are nondischargeable beyond those described in subsection (a)(5),” recognizing that "state protection for a divorced spouse and dependent children is no longer a simple matter of alimony and support payments.” Id. at 887 . "Property settlement arrangements are considered important components of the protection afforded individuals who, during the marriage, depended on the debtor for their economic well-being.” Id. 3 .This court has already rejected the related proposition that Section 523(a)(15) "was not meant to apply to all property settlement debts between husband and wife, but instead only to those situations where the debtor has agreed to indemnify his former spouse against a marital debt owed to a third party in exchange for lower alimony payments or a more favorable property settlement,”
2 later decisions 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.