Lee Supply Corp. v. Agnew’s Empirical Analysis
818 F.2d 1284 · 1987
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 86 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018 · most notably Frisby v. Schultz (1988), In the Matter of Robert John Love, Debtor-Appellant (1992)
14 federal appellate · 3 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
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 727
Relies on First National Bank v. Kimzey · Samson v. Alton Banking & Trust Co. · Thornburg v. Wiggins · Discenza v. MacDonald (In Re MacDonald)
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 86 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) that the act complained of was done at a time subsequent to one year before the date of the filing of the petition; (2) with actual intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor or an officer of the estate charged with custody of property under the Bankruptcy Code; (3) that the act was that of the debtor or his duly authorized agent; (4) that the act consisted of transferring, removing, destroying or concealing any of the debt- or’s property, or permitting any of these acts to be done.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“(a) The court shall grant the debtor a discharge, unless— (2) the debtor, with intent to hinder, delay, or defraud a creditor or an officer of the estate charged with custody of property under this title, has transferred, removed, destroyed, mutilated, or concealed, or has permitted to be, transferred, removed, destroyed, mutilated, or concealed.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“In order to justify the refusal of discharge under a section 727(a)(2) transfer, “it must be shown that there was an actual transfer of valuable property belonging to the debtor which reduced the assets available to creditor and which was made with fraudulent intent.” 4 Collier on Bankruptcy, supra, para. 727.02[5], at 727-21 to -22. FN1 This is consistent with a case relied upon by the district court below, which holds that a transfer may be found to be a fraudulent conveyance only if it reduces the assets that are actually available to a creditor.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.