In Re Healis’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently November 2011
4 federal appellate ·
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 11 U.S.C. § 1322 · 11 U.S.C. § 1325 · 11 U.S.C. § 1329 · 11 U.S.C. § 502 · 11 U.S.C. § 507 · 26 U.S.C. § 6621
Relies on In Re New England Carpet Co., Inc. · United States v. Coleman American Companies, Inc. (In Re Coleman American Companies, Inc.) · In Re Crotty · In Re Einspahr · In Re Christian
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Inasmuch as the IRS has assessed interest and penalties against the debtors in this case, we can only presume without evidence to the contrary that those penalties are intended to be punitive in nature. As such, no requirement for priority payment exists for these penalties.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[I]t is questionable that a compensatory role should be assigned to these penalties in light of the fact that interest is additionally charged. The pecuniary loss to the City of Winooski is the loss of the use of the tax money. This is precisely the kind of loss that the interest is supposed to compensate.”
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.