Seafort v. Burden’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(A) withheld by an employer from the wages of employees for payment as contributions— (i) to- il) an employee benefit plan that is subject to title I of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 or under an employee benefit plan which is a governmental plan under section 414(d) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; (II) a deferred compensation plan under section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; or (III) a tax-deferred annuity under section 403(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; except that such amount under this sub-paragraph shall not constitute disposable income as defined in section 1325(b)(2).... 3”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. In re Read · In re Vanlandingham

2. “[A] negative disposable income number on Form B22C does not conclusively establish the debtor has no disposable income to be received in the Applicable Commitment Period. Indeed, a feasible plan payment proposal rebuts the presumption that Form B22C alone determines disposable income. A negative number on Form B22C indicates a plan is not feasible. However, if the debtor can propose a feasible plan payment, then the debtor has shown there is, in fact, disposable income, and the plan must last for five years if his income is above median. Debtors cannot have it both ways. If they want to rely exclusively on Form B22C with a negative disposable income number, then they cannot propose a feasible plan. On the other hand, a feasible plan payment commits debtors to a certain plan length, for the above-median income debtor, of no less than five years.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. In re Boyd · In re Pliler

3. “whether the income that becomes available after the debtors have fully repaid their 401(k) loans (which is allowed by 11 U.S.C. § 1322 (f)) is “projected disposable income” to be paid to the unsecured creditors or whether the income can be used to begin making voluntary contributions to the debtors’ 401 (k) plans and deemed excludable from both disposable income and property of the estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541 (a)(1) and (b)(7).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Boyd · In re Pliler