In Re Wright’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently March 2006
1 federal appellate · 2 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. § 1302 · 11 U.S.C. § 1322 · 11 U.S.C. § 1325 · 28 U.S.C. § 586 (§ 224 of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 (Title 11))
Relies on Foster v. Heitkamp · In Re Evans · In Re Hines · In Re Hagensick · In Re Savage
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Notwithstanding the fact that 28 U.S.C. § 586 now vests in the Attorney General the authority to set a maximum 10 percent fee collectible by the trustee ‘from all payments received’, and thus fix the trustee’s annual compensation, the bankruptcy court in the confirmation process continues to control what funds are in fact received by the trustee.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Matter of Logemann
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.