Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 241 B.R. 394 - In Re JOHNSON

In Re JOHNSON’s Empirical Analysis

1999

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
November 2024
most recently cited

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently November 2024 · most notably In Re Heffernan (1999), In Re McNichols (2000)

2101999200020102020decided

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. § 1325 · 28 U.S.C. § 1334 · 28 U.S.C. § 157

Relies on Harshbarger v. Pees · 18 477 72162 Chaffin Chaffin · New York City Employees' Retirement System v. Villarie · In Re Jones · In Re Navarro

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

  1. “disposable income” any income which must be expended”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(b)(1) [i]f the trustee or the holder of an allowed unsecured claim objects to the confirmation of the plan, then the court may not approve the plan unless, as of the effective date of the plan— (A) the value of the property to be distributed under the plan on account of such claim is not less than the amount of such claim; or (B) the plan provides that all of the debtor’s projected disposable income to be received in the three-year period beginning on the date that the first payment is due under the plan will be applied to make payments under the plan. (2) For purposes of this subsection, “disposable income” means income which is received by the debtor and which is not reasonably necessary to be expended— (A) for the maintenance or support of the debtor or a dependent of the debt- or....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.