Jacobsen v. Moser’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 federal appellate ·

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

1. “for bad-faith conduct or abuse of the bankruptcy process.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Daughtrey v. Rivera (In re Daughtrey) · Viegelahn v. Lopez (In re Lopez)

2. “The Bankruptcy Code does not provide criteria for determining whether to dismiss or convert a Chapter 13 case upon a finding of cause, other than consideration of what is in the “best interest” of creditors and the bankruptcy estate. The decision to convert or dismiss falls within the sound discretion of the court. Because the language of 11 U.S.C. § 1307 (c) mirrors the language contained in 11 U.S.C. § 1112 (b), factors relevant to the question of whether dismissal or conversion is in the best interests of creditors and the estate in a chapter 11 case are also helpful to the Court’s consideration of conversion versus dismissal within the context of a chapter 13 case. Factors considered by courts when considering whether dismissal or conversion under 11 U.S.C. § 1112 (b) is in the best interest of creditors and the estate include: (1) whether some creditors received preferential payments, whether equality of distribution would be better served by conversion rather than dismissal; (2) whether there would be a loss of rights granted in the case if it were dismissed rather than converted; (3) whether the debtor would simply file a further case upon dismissal; (4) the ability of the trustee in a chapter 7 case to reach assets for the benefit of creditors; (5) in assessing the interest of the estate, whether conversion or dismissal of the estate would maximize the estate’s value as an economic enterprise; (6) whether any remaining issues would be better resolved outside the bankr”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Soppick

3. “We interpret § 1307 in accordance with the Supreme Court’s decision in Marra-ma. Although possessing slight variations in wording, both § 706(a) and § 1307(b) leave the decision to, convert or dismiss, respectively, to the debtor. Compare 11 U.S.C. § 706(a) (“The debt- or may convert ... at any time....”) with [11 U.S.C.] § 1307(b) (“On request of the debtor at any time, ... the court shall dismiss-”). The legislative history of each section reinforces the notion that the debtor’s right is absolute and unqualified. See S. REP. NO. 95-989, at 94 (1978), U.S.Code Cong. & Admin. News 1978, at p. 5880 (“Subsection (a) of [§ 706] gives the debtor the one-time absolute right of conversion.... ”); id. at 141, U.S. Code Cong. & Admin. News 1978, at p. 5927 (“Subsection[ ](b) [of § 1307] confirmas], without qualification, the right[ ] of a Chapter 13 debtor ... to have the Chapter 13 case dismissed.”). Yet notwithstanding the apparent absoluteness of a debtor’s right to dismiss under § 706(a), the Supreme Court held that the directive in the legislative history was “equivocal,” Marrama, 549 U.S. at 372 , 127 S.Ct. 1105 , and that such a right was qualified by an exception for bad-faith conduct by the debtor. See id. at 374 , 549 U.S. 365 , 127 S.Ct. 1105 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Taylor v. Winnecour (In Re Taylor)