Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 949 F.2d 1106 - Kulp Kulp v. J Zeman

Kulp Kulp v. J Zeman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
June 2015
most recently cited

4 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently June 2015

4 federal appellate ·

100199020002010decided

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 Sullivan v. United States · Hanover National Bank v. Moyses · Sturges v. Crowninshield · Stover v. Rau · Mullet First Bank of Colorado Springs v. Mullet

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. “(1) The following property is exempt from levy and sale under writ of attachment or writ of execution: (s) Property, including funds, held in or payable from any pension or retirement plan or deferred compensation plan, including those in which the debtor has received benefits or payments, has the present right to receive benefits or payments, or has the right to receive benefits or payments in the future and including pensions or plans which qualify under the federal “Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974” [ERISA], as amended, as an employee pension benefit plan, as defined in 29 U.S.C. sec. 1002, any individual retirement account, as defined in 26 U.S.C. sec. 408, any Roth individual retirement account, as defined in 26 U.S.C. sec. 408A, and any plan, as defined in 26 U.S.C. sec. 401, and as these plans may be amended from time to time[.]”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “The purpose of the bill was to allow a debtor in bankruptcy to claim an exemption for ERISA plans, IRA accounts, KEOGH plans, and any kind of pension or plan in which the debtor has received payments or has a present or future right to receive payments, (emphasis added by 10th Circuit)”
    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.