In the Matter of Michael VAN HORNE. Margaret CASPERS, Appellee, v. Michael VAN HORNE, Appellant’s Empirical Analysis
823 F.2d 1285 · 1987
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 293 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably St. Laurent v. Ambrose (1993), Equitable Bank v. Miller (1994)
13 federal appellate · 10 district · 2 state decisions
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. § 523
Relies on Barclays American/Business Credit, Inc. v. Long · In Re Ira Laurence Hunter, Debtor. Edwin Schweig v. Ira Laurence Hunter · Jennen v. Hunter · National Bank of North America v. Newmark (In Re Newmark)
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 293 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) the debtor made false representations; (2) at the time made, the debtor knew them to be false; (3) the representations were made with the intention and purpose of deceiving the creditor; (4) the creditor justifiably relied on the representations; and, (5) the creditor sustained the alleged injury as a proximate result of the representations having been made.”
16 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Because direct proof of intent (i.e., the debtor's state of mind) is nearly impossible to obtain, the creditor may present evidence of the surrounding circumstances from which intent may be inferred.”
15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“(1) The obtaining of money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinance of credit by a debtor; (2) use of a false representation pertaining to a past or present fact; (3) knowledge that the representation is false or asserting said representation as fact with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity; (4) an intent to deceive the other party or induce the other party to act based upon said representation; (5) a reasonable reliance by the creditor upon said misrepresentation; and (б) a resultant detriment to said creditor.”
13 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.