In Re: Darlene Olinda Annis’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
January 2017
most recently cited
1 federal appellate · 6 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 522
Relies on Kokoszka v. Belford · Andersen v. UNIPAC-NEBHELP · State Bank v. Gledhill · Barowsky v. Serelson · Wallerstedt v. Sosne
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under that definition, a person who used their wages to purchase a home could assert that the house constitutes “earnings from personal services,” or a person who invests their wages in the stock market could argue that the stock purchased constitutes “earnings from personal services.” In either circumstance, the property derived from the employee’s wages would constitute “earnings from personal services” under the Debt- or’s theory. Such a broad exemption, however, would swallow the rule: almost everything the debtor owned would be exempt from the bankruptcy estate because it is derived from a person’s wages.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Minton“As is apparent, then, the initial withholding itself constitutes a “tax,” with the refund constituting the return of an assessed tax. In the circumstances, the Debtor and the bankruptcy court were wrong to assert that the money never changed form but, instead, at all times remained wages of the employee (albeit, wages held for the employee by the government). Instead, once the wages were withheld as a “tax,” they lost their character as “wages.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Crutch
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.