In Re Games’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 1322 · 11 U.S.C. § 1324 · 11 U.S.C. § 1325 · 11 U.S.C. § 1328 · 11 U.S.C. § 362 · 11 U.S.C. § 507 · 11 U.S.C. § 523
Relies on Perez. v. Campbell · Bruning v. United States · Goeb v. Heid · Amfac Distribution Corp. v. Wolff (In Re Wolff) · Fidelity & Casualty Co. of New York v. Warren (In Re Warren)
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.
“The test is (1) whether the discrimination has a reasonable basis; (2) whether the debtor can carry out a plan without the discrimination; (3) whether the discrimination is proposed in good faith; and (4) whether the degree of discrimination is directly related to the basis or rationale for the discrimination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Gallipo
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.