Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 502 F.3d 61 - Denton v. Hyman

Denton v. Hyman’s Empirical Analysis

502 F.3d 61 · 2007

Citation profile

89
cited by 89 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
December 2020
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 89 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2020 · most notably 133 S. Ct. 1754 - Bullock v. BankChampaign, N. A. (2013), Bankruptcy Services, Inc. v. Ernst & Young (2008)

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

710200720102020decided

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. § 523

Relies on Grogan v. Garner · Kawaauhau v. Geiger · Marrese v. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons · Gleason v. Thaw · Marrama v. Citizens Bank of Mass.

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

  1. “[Defalcation under § 523(a)(4) requires a showing of conscious misbehavior or extreme recklessness' — a showing akin to the showing required for scienter in the securities law context. We believe that these concepts — well understood and commonly applied in the securities law context — strike the proper balance under § 523(a)(4). This standard ensures that the term “defalcation” complements but does not dilute the other terms of the provision — “fraud,” “embezzlement,” and “larceny” — all of which require a showing of actual wrongful intent. By requiring the courts to make appropriate findings of conscious misbehavior or recklessness in the course of dischargeability litigation, the standard we adopt today insures that the harsh sanction of non-dischargeability is reserved for those who exhibit “some portion of misconduct.” The standard does not reach fiduciaries who may have failed to account for funds or property for which they were responsible only as a consequence of negligence, inadvertence or similar conduct not shown to be sufficiently culpable.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “This [scienter] standard ... also has the virtue of ease of application since the courts and litigants have reference to a robust body of securities law examining what these terms mean”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “By requiring the courts to make appropriate findings of conscious misbehavior or recklessness in the course of dischargeability litigation, the standard ... insures that the harsh sanction of non-dischargeability is reserved for those who exhibit some portion of misconduct.”
    1 later decision 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.