Mercer v. Monzack’s Empirical Analysis
53 F.3d 1 · 1995
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently February 2023 · most notably United States v. Shadduck (1997), Williams v. Peyton (1997)
7 federal appellate · 4 district ·
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. § 105 · 11 U.S.C. § 522
Relies on Taylor v. Freeland & Kronz · Kahan v. Seror · Addison v. Reavis · Seror v. Kahan
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Notwithstanding Mercer’s argument that he intended to exempt the entire settlement fund, Schedule B-4 plainly listed discrete statutory citations supporting the various exemption claims, thereby restricting both the focus of the exemptions claimed and the description of the particular right or interest in property of the estate to which the claims applied. Consequently, pursuant to its exclusive summary jurisdiction, see, e.g., In re Stumpff, 109 B.R. 1014, 1017 (Bankr.E.D.Okla.1989), it remained for the bankruptcy court to determine whether the disputed right or interest in property of the estate was listed on Schedule B-4.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Kuhn · Williams v. Peyton“(1) “100%” of the potential settlement as a “disability” under § 522(d)(10)(C); (2) an exemption of “$7,500” as a “payment on account of personal bodily injury” under § 522(d)(11)(D); 11 (3) an exemption of “100%” as “payment in compensation for loss of future earnings” under § 522(d)(11)(E); and (4) an exemption of “$3,750” under § 522(d)(5).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Harrington · In Re Jackson“The debtor shall file a list of property that the debtor claims as exempt under subsection (b) of this section.... Unless a party in interest objects, the property claimed as exempt on such list is exempt.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Betz · Edmonston v. Murphy
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.