In Re Elliott’s Empirical Analysis
1948
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently December 2000
3 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 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
Relies on Iscovitz v. Filderman · Peoples Savings & Dime Bank & Trust Co. v. Scott · In re Wolf · American Trust Co. v. Kaufman · Siplyak v. Davis
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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ ‘c. The court shall grant the discharge unless satisfied that the bankrupt has * * * (4) at any time subsequent to the first day of the twelve months immediately preceding the filing of the peti tion in bankruptcy, transferred, removed, destroyed or concealed, or permitted to be removed, destroyed or concealed any of his property with intent to hinder, delay or defraud his creditors.’ ” The evident purpose of the statute is to deny a discharge to the bankrupt whose plan is to hide his assets in some fashion, go through bankruptcy, obtain a discharge from his debts, retake his property and proceed unhindered by his former creditors. It likewise is designed to withhold relief from the man whose standards have decayed to the point where his view is that if he can not keep his property, his creditors shall receive no benefit from it either. [1 Cowans § 122]. * * * * * * The gist of this ground of objection is intent. This is not the area of accidental or unforeseen harms. The bankrupt himself must have intended the result of hindering, delaying, or defrauding his creditors .... The courts have said that the intent on the part of the bankrupt must be actual as distinguished from constructive intent. Actual intent can be most difficult to prove. Through the time-honored legal devices of inferences and presumptions the courts transcend the problem of the search for proof of actual intent. It is clear that in the ordinary course of events, people do not give away much of their prop”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re May
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.