Kibbe v. Sumski’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 8 district ·

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

1. “"disposable income” means current monthly income received by the debtor ... less amounts reasonably necessary to be expended— (A)(i) for the maintenance or support of the debtor or a dependent of the debtor ...”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Marshall v. Blake · In Re Michaud

2. “where the debtor’s income at confirmation or as reasonably anticipated for the plan commitment period is materially different from the debtor’s “disposable income” as defined by § 1325(b)(2), the court must depart from the Form B22C calculation. The calculation of disposable income according to Form B22C can not be determinative of the debtor’s “projected disposable income” because it does not take into account the debtor’s circumstances as of the petition date or foreseeable changes in circumstances in income during the plan commitment period.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Hildebrand v. Petro (In Re Petro)

3. “Attaching the word “projected” to a historical calculation assumes, without justification, that a debtor’s circumstances will not change after the date of case commencement or during the plan commitment period. Life informs otherwise. Insofar as the term “disposable income” demands a look back and the term “projected” requires a look forward, the language is irreconcilable.... One must give way to the other, or the courts must fashion an interpretation that gives the greatest meaning to both.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Re Almonte