In the Matter of Martin Szekely and Donna Szekelys’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 45 later decisions — most recently March 2021 · most notably Stoecker Raleigh, In the Matter of Daniel L Lybrook and Linda Lou Lybrooks
3 federal appellate · 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 In Re Jartran Inc Fruehauf Corporation · 71496 Morse Electric Company Inc Hoosier Fence Company Inc · 42 Ill. App. 3d 688 - Dixon v. Moller · In the Matter of William W. Wagner, Debtor-Appellant · Fox Herrell
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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Every individual is entitled to an estate of homestead to the extent in value of $7,500 of his or her interest in ... personal property, owned or rightly possessed by lease or otherwise and occupied by him or her as a residence .... That homestead and all right in and title to that homestead is exempt from attachment, judgment, levy, or judgment sale for the payment of his or her debts or other purposes....”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Owens · In Re Ross“a judgment does not lose its finality merely because there is uncertainty about its collectibility, corresponding to uncertainty about how many cents on the dollar the creditor will actually receive on his claim once all the bankrupt's assets are marshaled and compared with the total of allowed claims, and the priorities among those claims are determined. Thus the fact that the bankruptcy proceeding continues before the bankruptcy judge does not preclude treating an interlocutory order by him — interlocutory in the sense that it does not terminate the entire proceeding — as final for purposes of appellate review. (And if it is final for those purposes, then so is the district court's affirmance of his order.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the trustee points out correctly that the debtors’ home became an asset of the bankrupt estate upon the declaration of bankruptcy. 11 U.S.C. § 541 . Thus, by continuing to live in the house, the Szekelys were using an asset that belonged to the bankrupt estate, not to them. Therefore — the trustee argues— they should be required to pay rent for its use, just as anyone else leasing assets of the estate would be required to pay rent to the trustee.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Payne
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.