541 F. Supp. 506 - Curry v. Block’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
17 federal appellate · 11 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently March 2002 · most notably Love v. United States (1989), Allison v. Block (1983)
17 federal appellate · 11 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 42 U.S.C. § 1471 · 42 U.S.C. § 1475 · 7 U.S.C. § 1921 (Agricultural Credit Act of 1978) · 7 U.S.C. § 1922 · 7 U.S.C. § 1923 · 7 U.S.C. § 1927 · 7 U.S.C. § 1941 · 7 U.S.C. § 1942
Relies on Skidmore v. Swift & Co. · Cannon v. University of Chicago · Albernaz v. United States · United States 77-1359 v. Kimbell Foods Inc · Barrett v. United States
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a showing by the borrower that due to circumstances beyond the borrower's control the borrower is temporarily unable to continue making payments of such principal and interest when due without unduly impairing the standard of living of the borrower.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“In another amendment to title I, Mr. Moore proposed that the Secretary should have explicit authority to provide a moratorium on payment of principal and interest and to forego foreclosure on Farmers Home Administration loans, upon a showing by the borrower that due to circumstances beyond his control he was temporarily unable to meet an installment when due without unduly impairing his standard of living. Comparable language appears in the Housing Act with respect to housing loans by the Farmers Home Administration and was recommended by Mr. Moore in order to clarify the Secretary’s authority. The amendment was accepted by the committee with a change offered by Mr. Moore to provide that this would be in addition to any authority the Secretary may have under existing law, so that the Secretary’s authority under current law would not be reduced or impaired by the proposed amendment.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ramey v. Block · Allison v. Block“[T]he language of the statute expressly provides that the deferral mechanism is triggered “at the request of the borrower.” Further, no deferral relief will be forthcoming absent “a showing by the borrower that due to circumstances beyond the borrower’s control, the borrower is temporarily unable to continue making payments of such principal and interest when due without unduly impairing the standard of living of the borrower.” 7 U.S.C. § 1981a (emphasis added). Logically, the borrower is unable to request the deferral relief and show his eligibility to receive the same unless he has notice of the contents of § 1981a and an opportunity to be heard.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Ramey v. Block · Curry v. Block
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.