Smith’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
11 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 108 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2018 · most notably Schwab v. Reilly (2010), Bruce K. Cable, As in Possession v. Ivy Tech State College (1999)
11 federal appellate · 7 district · 2 state decisions
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. § 522
Relies on Porter v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. · Riggs v. Government Employees Financial Corp. · Matter of Upright · Binnick v. Avco Financial Services of Nebraska, Inc. · 387 F. Supp. 1395 - Meehan v. Nelsonville Mobile Home Sales
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 108 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“all legal or equitable interests of the debtor in property as of the commencement of the case.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““Congress found that ‘there is a Federal interest in seeing that a debtor that [sic] goes through bankruptcy comes out with adequate possessions to begin his fresh start.’ The general exemption was intended to ensure that there was no discrimination between homeowners and non-homeowners in achieving that goal. By permitting non-homeowners (or homeowners with property valued under $7,500) to exempt the unused portion of the homestead exemption, plus $400, Congress in effect gave all debtors potentially the same $7,900 stake . . . Exemption statutes are to be construed liberally. In view of Congress’ goal of providing a meaningful fresh start for debtors, it makes no sense to limit the type of property that may be applied to the general exemption without a clear statement of Congressional intent to do so.” Id. at 891 . (Emphasis added.)”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Congress found that ‘there is a Federal interest in seeing that a debtor that [sic] goes through bankruptcy comes out with adequate possessions to begin his fresh start.’ The general exeption [sic] was intended to ensure that there was no discrimination between homeowners and nonhomeowners in achieving that goal. By permitting nonhomeowners (or homeowners with property valued under $7,500) to exempt the unused portion of the homestead exemption, plus $400, Congress in effect gave all debtors potentially the same $7,900 stake.”
4 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.