In Re Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate ·

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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[t]he Bankruptcy Code permits a Chapter 13 debtor to cure a home mortgage arrearage within a ‘reasonable time'. 11 U.S.C. § 1322 (b)(5). In no event, however, may plan payments extend more than five years. 11 U.S.C. § 1322 (c). Therefore, in every case a ‘reasonable time’ must be five years or less ... ... Yet if this Court were to confirm the present plan, the Debtor and her husband jointly would have been allowed about seven and one-half years to cure the arrearage. Thus, the Jacksons’ would have achieved in four cases (the first three of which failed) what Congress has prohibited a debtor from doing in one case. ... Attempts to use serial filings to achieve purposes otherwise unattainable under the Bankruptcy Code have been characterized as ‘bad faith’ by other Courts. (Citations omitted).” (Emphasis added).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Thomas

2. “Good faith is not synonymous with honesty and bad faith is not synonymous with dishonesty. But if the good faith requirement of Section 1322 means anything, it means that the proposed plan cannot be a device to avoid the limitations imposed by the Bankruptcy Code itself. The good faith requirement “is meant to bar the confirmation of a chapter 13 plan ... where the proposed plan, if consummated, would contravene the spirit of Chapter 13.” H.R.Rep. No. 1195, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. 24 (1980). Although the plan proposed here, looked at in isolation, appears to comply with the spirit and purposes of Chapter 13, when viewed in combination with the prior filings, the effect would be the circumvent of statutory limitations on the powers of Chapter 13 debtors to compromise the rights of secured creditors.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Earl