In Re Tveten’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 5 district · 19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 58 later decisions — most recently January 2016 · most notably Norwest Bank Nebraska, N.A. v. Tveten (1988), In Re Haggerty (1989)
11 federal appellate · 5 district · 19 state decisions
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 28 U.S.C. § 151 (Bankruptcy Amendments)
Relies on United States v. Euge · Wichelman v. Messner · State ex rel. Board of Courthouse & City Hall Com'rs v. Cooley · Forsberg v. Security State Bank of Canova · AFSCME Councils 6, 14, 65 & 96, AFL-CIO v. Sundquist
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 58 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) the classification applies to and embraces all who are similarly situated with respect to conditions or wants justifying appropriate legislation; (b) the distinctions are not manifestly arbitrary or fanciful but are genuine and substantial so as to provide a natural and reasonable basis justifying the distinction; and (c) there is an evident connection between the distinctive needs peculiar to the class and the remedy or regulations therefor which the law purports to provide.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“A reasonable amount of property shall be exempt from seizure or sale for the payment of any debt or liability. The amount of such exemption shall be determined by law.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“[I]t does not follow that just because the “reasonable amount” language of the constitution requires some value limitation, that it requires a specific value limit. For example, the section governing employee benefits only exempts those benefits ‘to the extent reasonably necessary for the support of the debtor and any dependent of the debtor’. Minn.Stat. § 550.37, subd. 24 (1986). This type of limitation clearly passes constitutional scrutiny because it requires a court to limit the size of the exemption based upon objective criteria.”
4 later decisions 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.