Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 491 F.3d 811 - Benn v. S

Benn v. S’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

32
cited by 32 later decisions
2
states following
July 2021
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently July 2021 · most notably McGuire v. Kenoma, LLC (2012), McCarty v. Lasowski (2009)

4 federal appellate · 3 district · 3 state decisions

250200020102020decided

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

Relies on Owen v. Owen · Guidry v. Sheet Metal Workers National Pension Fund · Barowsky v. Serelson · Wallerstedt v. Sosne · Garner v. Strauss

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

  1. “[W]e do not think it unreasonable to expect that the Missouri legislature might grant powers or remedies to a bankruptcy trustee that are unavailable to a non-bankruptcy creditor. As the Trustee points out, it is ‘a basic quid pro quo of bankruptcy’ that ‘debtors receive extraordinary relief that is unavailable outside of bankruptcy by obtaining a bankruptcy discharge, and bankruptcy trustees have powers that are unavailable to creditors outside of bankruptcy in order to provide the body of creditors as a whole a chance at some recovery.’ That common law remedies available to a non-bankruptcy creditor would not reach certain property interests of the debtor does not inexorably lead to the conclusion that the legislature would elect as a matter of policy to create an exemption that excludes that property from the bankruptcy estate.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
  2. “Every person by or against whom an order is sought for relief under Title 11, United States Code, shall be permitted to exempt from property of the estate any property that is exempt from attachment and execution under the law of the state of Missouri or under federal law, other than Title 11, United States Code, Section 522 (d), and no such person is authorized to claim as exempt the property that is specified under Title 11, United States Code, Section 522 (d).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “A [chapter 7] debtor’s anticipated tax refund, to the extent it is attributable to events occurring prior to the filing of the petition for bankruptcy, is part of the bankruptcy estate.”); Barowsky v. Serelson (In re Barowsky), 946 F.2d 1516, 1518 (10th Cir.1991) (”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.