Wicks v. Wicks’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently June 2015
3 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 522
Relies on Boyd v. Robinson (In Re Boyd)
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(30) ‘judicial lien’ means lien obtained by judgment, levy, sequestration, or other legal or equitable process or proceeding; * * * * * * (43) ‘security interest’ means lien created by an agreement; .... As stated in Wicks : Congress intended that all liens created by agreement be considered security interests. The lien of the plaintiff was given force and effect by the order of the court but analysis of the facts does not end there. The agreement was entirely the product of the consent of both parties. It was this agreement which authorized and caused the judgment and decree to be entered by the district court. Congress, in the Bankruptcy Code, altered many concepts. The term “security interest” should be construed liberally to include all liens created by agreement regardless of the method or means employed to make them enforceable either between the parties or against the world.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Shands · In Re Bland“The Plaintiff and the Defendant made an agreement which resulted in an alteration in their relationship and property rights. The Defendant now seeks to have the advantage of the agreement but to avoid its onerous results. A compelling and explicit statutory requirement to the contrary would be required to negative the parties agreement and permit such an unfair result.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the result of a consensual voluntary transfer ... [and] is a security interest as defined under 11 U.S.C. Section 101(37)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Parker v. Donahue
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.