In Re Rivers’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 109 · 11 U.S.C. § 1325 · 11 U.S.C. § 301 · 11 U.S.C. § 704 · 11 U.S.C. § 707
Relies on Mayo Foundation for Medical Education & Research v. United States · Hamilton v. Lanning · Ransom v. FIA Card Services, N. A. · In Re Fowler · Morse v. Rudler
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a key date for the determination of both debtors' and creditors' rights.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[e]ligibility is determined as of the filing of the petition”
1 later decision 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.