Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 400 F.3d 1016 - Fowler v. Shadel

Fowler v. Shadel’s Empirical Analysis

400 F.3d 1016 · 2005

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
July 2017
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Relies on 29 114 75276 Yonikus Yonikus · Button v. Hoffman · In re Yonikus · Normandin v. Normandin (In Re Normandin)

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.

  1. “[h]ere, Fowler [the debtor] could presumably have become the legal owner of the vehicles by dissolving the corporation before filing for bankruptcy and could then have claimed the Wisconsin exemption. However, by filing for bankruptcy first, Fowler’s shares of stock passed at the time of filing to the bankruptcy estate and became property of the trustee, who thereby acquired the equitable interest in the corporate property. At that point in time Fowler could no longer claim an exemption based on his claim to an equitable interest in the corporate property because the equitable interest was attached to the shares of stock, which had passed to the trustee.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[w]e follow in the footsteps of the bankruptcy court and the district court in expressing our sympathy to Fowler for the consequences of this holding, which will apparently deprive him of the use of the truck by which he generates most of his income. This result apparently could have been avoided by liquidating the corporation before filing for bankruptcy. As the matter stands now, we cannot breath[e] life into an equitable interest that followed the shares of stock”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[Corporate assets ... are not property of the [individual] debtor and therefore cannot become property of [the debtor’s] bankruptcy estate. Hence, the question of an exemption does not arise. For example, if the debtor owns shares in a corporation, the shares become part of the estate; the assets of the corporation do not.”
    1 later decision 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.