Lynch v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis
853 F.3d 116 · 2017
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 104 · 11 U.S.C. § 704 · 11 U.S.C. § 707 · 28 U.S.C. § 158 · 28 U.S.C. § 2075
Relies on Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc. · Pegram v. Herdrich · Davis v. Michigan Department of the Treasury · Day v. McDonough · Mayo Foundation for Medical Education & Research v. United States
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In Ransom v. FIA Card Servs., 562 U.S. 61 , 131 S.Ct. 716 , 178 L.Ed.2d 603 (2011), the Supreme Court was tasked with interpreting 11 U.S.C. § 707 (b)(2)(A)(ii)(I). It held that an expense is “applicable,” as used in § 707(b)(2)(A)(ii)(I), “only if the debtor will incur that kind of expense during the life of the plan.” Ransom, 562 U.S. at 70 , 131 S.Ct. 716 . However, the Court expressly declined to reach the issue of “the proper deduction for a debtor who has expenses that are lower than the amounts listed in the Local Standards.” Id. at 75 n. 8, 131 S.Ct. 716 (emphasis in original). This court must now address the issue that the Supreme Court declined to reach in Ransom . Based on the plain language of the statute, we hold that a debtor is entitled to deduct the full National and Local Standard amounts even if they have actual expenses below the standard amounts.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Lopez“We granted the appeal as to the following question: whether 11 U.S.C. § 707 (b)(2) permits a debtor to take the full National and Local Standard amounts for expenses even though the debtor incurs actual expenses that are less than the standard amounts. We conclude that debtors are entitled to the full National and Local Standard amount for a category of expenses if they incur an expense in that category.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Lopez“In considering under paragraph (1) whether the granting of relief would be an abuse of the provisions of this chapter, the court shall presume abuse exists if the debtor’s current monthly income reduced by the amounts determined under clauses (ii), (iii), and (iv), and multiplied by 60 is not less than the lesser of [[Image here]] § 707(b)(2)(A)®, emphasis original.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Lopez
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.