Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 340 F.3d 337 - Maughan v. M

Maughan v. M’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
June 2024
most recently cited

4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently June 2024 · most notably In Re William M. Behlke (2004), Baermann v. Ryan (In Re Ryan) (2009)

4 district ·

180200020102020decided

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

Relies on Torres v. Oakland Scavenger Co. · Taylor v. Freeland & Kronz · United States v. Locke · Andrews v. Orr · Downs v. Cooper /

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

  1. “(a) Persons entitled to file complaint A debtor or any creditor may file a complaint to obtain a determination of the dischargeability of any debt. (c) Time for filing complaint under § 523(c) in a chapter 7 liquidation ...; notice of time fixed A complaint to determine the dis-chargeability of a debt under § 523(c) [in a chapter 7 liquidation] shall be filed no later than 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a).... On motion of a party in interest, after hearing on notice, the court may for cause extend the time fixed under this subdivision. The motion shall be filed before the time has expired. (e) Applicability of rules in Part VII A proceeding commenced by a complaint filed under this rule is governed by Part VII 5 of these rules.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(1) lack of actual notice of filing requirement; (2) lack of constructive knowledge of filing requirement; (3) diligence in pursuing one’s rights; (4) absence of prejudice to the defendant; and (5) a plaintiffs reasonableness in remaining ignorant of the notice requirement.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(a) Time for filing complaint objecting to discharge; notice of time fixed In a chapter 7 liquidation case a complaint objecting to the debtor’s discharge under § 727(a) of the Code shall be filed no later than 60 days after the first date set for the meeting of creditors under § 341(a).... (b) Extension of time On motion of any party in interest, after hearing on notice, the court may for cause extend the time to file a complaint objecting to discharge. The motion shall be filed before the time has expired. (c) Grant of discharge (1) In a chapter 7 ease, on expiration of the time fixed for filing a complaint objecting to discharge ..., the court shall forthwith grant the discharge unless: (E) a motion to extend the time for filing a complaint objecting to the discharge is pending[.]”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.