Checkett v. Vickers’s Empirical Analysis
954 F.2d 1426 · 1992
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Schlein v. Mills (1993), In Re Collett (2000)
1 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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 Shaw v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · Pilot Life Insurance v. Dedeaux · MacKey v. Lanier Collection Agency & Service, Inc. · Owen v. Owen · Heitkamp v. Dyke
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) Debtor’s present and anticipated living expenses; (2) Debtor’s present and anticipated income from all sources; (3) Age of the debtor and dependents; (4) Health of the debtor and dependents; (5) Debtor’s ability to work and earn a living; (6) Debtor’s job skills, training, and education; (7) Debtor’s other assets, including exempt assets; (8) Liquidity of other assets; (9) Debtor’s ability to save for retirement; (10) Special needs of the debtor and dependents; (11) Debtor’s financial obligations, e.g., alimony or support payments.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he Missouri exemption provision [found in (10)(e) ] is virtually identical to that found in [ § 522(d)(10)(E) ].”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Shields · Schlein v. Mills“A straightforward preemption analysis focusing solely on the force and effect of the ERISA preemption provision as it relates to a state exemption scheme ignores the Bankruptcy Code. Just as Congress is empowered to reserve for itself an area for exclusive regulation and control, as it has certainly done for pension and welfare benefit plans, it may also authorize states to exercise final authority without regard to other federal legislation. I believe this has been done in the Bankruptcy Code. [[Image here]] The Bankruptcy Code not only authorizes states to fashion exemptions in bankruptcy as they see fit, but provides therein a model example of an exemption that the majority would prohibit ... Disallowing a valid state exemption in bankruptcy would impair the Bankruptcy Code no less than invalidating state civil right grievance mechanisms impairs Title VII.”
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.