In Re Mendelson’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 1325 · 11 U.S.C. § 707
Relies on Kibbe v. Sumski · Hamilton v. Lanning · In Re Lanning · In Re Quigley · In Re DeThample
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“would be stretching the bounds of reason to find that repayment of a loan on a vehicle driven exclusively by the Debtor’s ex-husband” is”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Rabener
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.