In Re Gonzalez’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently February 2010
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. § 1322 · 11 U.S.C. § 1328 · 11 U.S.C. § 507 · 11 U.S.C. § 523
Relies on Groves Groves v. V · McCullough v. Brown (In Re Brown) · Matter of Keel · In Re Beverly
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Chapter 13 debtors have proposed, and many courts have approved, separate classifications for certain parties: (a) landlords; (b) attorneys; (c) doctors; (d) trade creditors; and (e) banks extending credit necessary for the continued operation of a Chapter 13 debtor’s business. See In re Groves, 39 F.3d 212 (8th Cir.1994). Hence, the discrimination right exists in a Chapter 13 [ease]. There is no automatic denial of a Chapter 13 Plan because of discrimination among the classes. Instead, the statutory prohibition of 11 U.S.C. § 1322 (b)(1) requires one to discriminate “fairly” as opposed to “unfairly.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Matter of Smith
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.