Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 715 F.2d 859 - Shirkey v. Leake

Shirkey v. Leake’s Empirical Analysis

715 F.2d 859 · 1983

Citation profile

44
cited by 44 later decisions
2
states following
September 2016
most recently cited

7 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 44 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably XL/Datacomp, Inc. v. Wilson (1994), Tignor v. Parkinson (1984)

7 federal appellate · 3 district · 2 state decisions

2201983199020002010decided

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

Relies on Lockwood v. Exchange Bank · White v. Stump · Doan v. Hudgins · Smith · Cheeseman v. Nachman

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

  1. “The requirement that personal property be described with “reasonable certainty” cannot be defined by a universal standard. Nonetheless, courts cannot be allowed to make wholly subjective determinations of reasonableness. Whether a description is reasonably certain involves a judgment that takes into consideration the purpose of exemption statutes and the characteristics of the object to be described. Certain clearly defined principles exist to assist a court in the exercise of its discretion. In Goldburg v. Salyer, 188 Va. 573 , 50 S.E.2d 272 (1948), the Supreme Court of Virginia explained that Virginia’s exemption statutes “are enacted to insure an unfortunate debtor and his equally unfortunate, but more helpless, family a means of shelter and a measure of existence.” The Court admonished that provisions for exemption “must be liberally construed in favor of the debtor and strictly against the creditor.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “all legal or equitable interests of the debtor in property as of the commencement of the case.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “§ 34-14. How set apart in personal estate; form to claim exemption of personal property Such personal estate selected by the householder and under §§ 34^4, 34-4.1, or § 34-13 shall be set apart in a writing signed by him. He shall, in the writing, designate and describe with reasonable certainty the personal estate so selected and set apart and each parcel or article, affixing to each his cash valuation thereof. Such writing shall be admitted to record, to be recorded as deeds are recorded in the county or city wherein such householder resides. Such writing or deed shall not be required to secure any exemption under this Code except those exemptions created by §§ 34-4, 34-4.1 and 34-13.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.