Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 732 F.2d 564 - In the Matter of Richard L. Kochell, Debtor-Appellant

In the Matter of Richard L. Kochell, Debtor-Appellant’s Empirical Analysis

1984

Citation profile

56
cited by 56 later decisions
March 2018
most recently cited

4 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably In Re Schnabel (1993), In Re Jones (1985)

4 district ·

2401984199020002010decided

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 Warren v. Taff (In Re Taff) · Clark v. O'Neill · In Re Howerton · In Re Donaghy · Matter of Kochell

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

  1. “(c) Except for any portion of the assets that were deposited for the purpose of evading the payment of any debt, the person’s right in the assets held in, or to receive any payment under, any individual retirement account, individual retirement annuity, or Keogh, or “H.R. 10” plan that provides benefits by reason of illness, disability, death, or age, to the extent reasonably necessary for the support of the person and any of his dependents.”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “... the reasonably necessary standard requires that the Court take into account other income and exempt property of the debtor, present and anticipated ... and that the appropriate amount to be set aside for the debtor ought to be sufficient to sustain basic needs not related to [the debtor’s] former status in society or the life style to which he is accustomed ... (Parentheses added). In re Taff, id., at 107, 4 C.B.C.2d 65, 70 (1981).”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “$ jJc sfe sfc sfs (d) The following property may be exempted under subsection (b)(1) of this section: * * * * * * (10) The debtor’s right to receive— ‡ s(c )j< $ * $ (E) a payment under a stock bonus, pension, profitsharing, annuity, or similar plan or contract on account of illness, disability, death, age, or length of service, to the extent reasonably necessary for the support of the debtor and any dependent of the debtor, (emphasis added), * * * * * *”
    2 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.