Irwin v. Hunnewell’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

16 state decisions

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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““* * * For it is well settled and is conceded that a promise to pay a debt from which the debtor has been discharged in a bankruptcy proceeding, to be effective, must be direct and definite. A mere acknowledgment of such a debt, with an expression of intention to pay it at some indefinite time, is not an enforceable obligation. Bach v. Cohn, 3 La.Ann. 101 ; Beck v. Howard, 3 La.Ann. 501 ; Linton v. Stanton, 4 La.Ann. 401 ; Bartlett v. Peck, 5 La. Ann. 669 ; Glenn v. Dunbar’s Adm’x, 10 La.Ann. 253 ; Collier on Bankruptcy, 13th Ed., Vol. 1, § 17, p. 643; Gilbert’s Collier on Bankruptcy, 4th Ed., § 17, p. 385; 8 C.J.S., Bankruptcy, § 583, p. 1571; 6 Am.Jur., Bankruptcy, § 532, p. 832; Allen & Co. v. Ferguson, 18 Wall. 1 , 85 U.S. 1 , 21 L.Ed. 854 .” “ * * * To the same effect was the decision in Beck v. Howard, 3 La.Ann. 501 . And from Linton v. Stanton, 4 La.Ann. 401 , we quote: “ ‘It has been often held that a new promise to pay a debt discharged by certificate, must be express, distinct, and unequivocal. The intention of the bankrupt to bind himself must be clear.’ ” “ * * * In 8 C.J.S., Bankruptcy, § 583, p. 1571, the rule is stated thus: ‘In order to revive a liability on a debt discharged in bankruptcy or to create a new enforceable obligation, there must be an express promise to pay the specific debt, made to the creditor or his agent, and while no particular form of language is necessary, to constitute such a new promise there must be a clear, distinct, and unequivocal r”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Securities Finance Co. v. Marbury · 472 So. 2d 74 - National Bank of Commerce in Jefferson Parish v. Bowles

2. ““In order to revive a liability on a debt discharged in bankruptcy or to create a new enforceable obligation, there must be an express promise to pay the specific debt, made to the creditor or his agent, and while no particular form of language is necessary, to constitute such a new promise there must be a clear, distinct, and unequivocal recognition and renewal of the debt as a binding obligation, anything short thereof being insufficient, as, for example, the mere acknowledgment of the discharged debt, or the expression of hope, desire, expectation, or intention to pay or revive the same.” “Unless otherwise provided by statute, an enforceable promise to pay a discharged debt may be made orally. The promise must, however, be either express or directly implied in the terms used; it cannot be implied simply from conduct recognizing the debt, for example, from a payment on account of either principal or interest. No particular form of words need be used provided the promise is clear, distinct, and unequivocal, and is constituted of words which in their natural import identify the debt and express a present intention on the part of the bankrupt to bind himself to its payment. A simple acknowledgment of the justness of a debt and of its present existence as a debt formerly contracted and now unpaid, or the expression of a hope, desire, expectation, or intention to pay, is not sufficient. Nor is the effect of a discharge avoided by a promise to do something other than pay the disc”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Service Finance Co. of Baton Rouge v. Daigle · 223 So. 2d 202 - Beneficial Finance Co. v. Lalumia