423 F. Supp. 1388 - Wise v. Capshaw’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “Thus, while considerable latitude for finding the propriety of filing challenges to discharges is vested in the Bankruptcy Court, such actions must be undertaken in compliance with the provisions of the Bankruptcy Act and Rules, which are designed to protect the interests of both the bankrupt and his creditors. The balance between the entitlement of the bankrupt to his discharge and the interest of creditors in avoiding such a discharge when possible fraud or other grounds exist changes as the proceedings in bankruptcy moves through its various stages. The pre-requisites for asserting a challenge to the bankrupt’s discharge change accordingly and must be complied with. In re Capshaw, 423 F.Supp. 1388, 1390-91 (D.C.1977). (emphasis added)”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Fuerst v. Anderson (In Re Anderson) · Guistino v. Anderson (In Re Anderson)

2. “... [Challenges to discharges ... must be undertaken in compliance with the Bankruptcy (Code) and Rules, which are designed to protect the interests of both the bankrupt and his creditors. The balance between the entitlement of the bankrupt to his discharge and the interest of creditors in avoiding such a discharge when possible fraud or other grounds exist changes as the proceeding in bankruptcy moves through its various stages. The pre-requisites for asserting a challenge to the bankrupt’s discharge change accordingly and must be complied with.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. LaPadula Gordon & Co. v. Gordon (In re Gordon) · Lipshultz v. Griffis (In Re Griffis)

3. ““This provision gives the Bankruptcy Judge wide discretion to allow late filings but that discretion must be based on facts upon which a finding of excusable neglect can be made. Keenan v. Builders Applices, Inc., 384 F.Supp. 14 (E.D.Wis.1974). “Absent the exercise of its discretion based upon experience, judgment, and a factual record in finding excusable neglect, the Bankruptcy Court may not permit the filing of a complaint objecting to the bankrupt’s discharge.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In Matter of Cleary