Wiggains v. Reed’s Empirical Analysis
848 F.3d 655 · 2017
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 363 · 11 U.S.C. § 522 · 11 U.S.C. § 548 · 28 U.S.C. § 158
Relies on United States v. Rodgers · Palazzolo v. Rhode Island · Shapiro v. Wilgus · Gibson v. United States · Smiley v. First National Bank of Belleville
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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A number of courts have interpreted the phrase "intent to hinder, delay, or defraud" in the Bankruptcy Code to require fraudulent intent, despite acknowledging the disjunctive phraseology. The majority of courts holding that the phrase "intent to hinder, delay, or defraud" constitutes a single test have cited back to the Elizabethan origins of the phrase and the historical common understanding in fraudulent conveyance law that actual fraud be involved.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“In addition to those courts construing th[e] phrase ['intent to hinder, delay, or defraud'] to provide three alternative bases in the context of section 548(a)(1)(A), an abundance of courts have also interpreted the same phrase appearing in section 727(a)(2)(A) to offer three separate grounds.”
1 later decision 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.