In the Matter of Don Orriel Neis, Debtor-Appellant’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
8 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably In the Matter of Robert John Love, Debtor-Appellant (1992), 29 114 75276 Yonikus Yonikus
8 federal appellate · 4 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
Relies on Pullman-Standard v. Swint · Universal Minerals, Inc. v. C. A. Hughes & Co. · Machinery Rental, Inc. v. Herpel · Armstrong v. Collier · 66 Wis. 2d 157 - Schwanz v. Teper
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The statute thus requires that an owner be a resident-occupant of the property claimed as a homestead subject to two exceptions: (1) when the owner is temporarily absent with an intent to return and (2) when the house is to be sold with the proceeds intended for the purchase of another homestead. Thus, with respect to these exceptions, the owner’s intent is crucial to a determination of qualification for the homestead exemption.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Fink · In Re Bradshaw“[tjhere is a strong public policy in this state to protect the homestead exemption. Because of this public policy, homestead statutes are liberally construed in favor of the debtor, and homestead rights are preferred over the rights of creditors.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Kienol · In Re Mann“815.20. Homestead exemption definition. (1) An exempt homestead ... selected by a resident owner and occupied by him or her shall be exempt from execution ... to the amount of $40,000, ... except as otherwise provided. The exemption shall not be impaired by temporary removal with the intention to reoccupy the premises as a homestead nor by the sale of the homestead, but shall extend to the proceeds derived from the sale to an amount not exceeding $40,000, while held, with the intention to procure another homestead with the proceeds, for 2 years.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Bradshaw
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.