Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 355 B.R. 813 - In Re Heck

In Re Heck’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

7
cited by 7 later decisions
December 2015
most recently cited

1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 523 · 11 U.S.C. § 541

Relies on Butner v. United States · Integrated Solutions, Inc. v. Service Support Specialties, Inc. · Heiman v. Parrish · United States v. Brookridge Farm, Inc. · City of Olathe v. KAR Development Associates, L.P. (In Re KAR Development Associates, L.P.)

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

  1. “These circumstances make clear that the Debtor could not make plan payments without Sutcliffe’s contribution of housing, food, and utilities, and perhaps half of the plan payments themselves. As the Bank points out, since the Debtor and Sutcliffe are not married, he has no legal obligation to pay any of her expenses. A leading commentator on Chapter 13, Bankruptcy Judge Keith M. Lundin, reports in his treatise that courts have generally been somewhat willing to consider gratuitous contributions from the non-bankruptcy-fíling spouse of a debtor to be “regular income” for purposes of Chapter 13 eligibility, more reluctant when the contributions are from other family members or relatives, and willing to accept them from someone like a boyfriend only when he makes a formal promise to help fund the plan and testifies about his ability to do so. Under circumstances similar to this case, at least two courts have held the debtor did not have sufficient “regular income” to be eligible to be a Chapter 13 debtor. 16”
    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.