Hardy v. United States ex rel. Internal Revenue Service’s Empirical Analysis
97 F.3d 1384 · 1996
Citation profile
23 federal appellate · 7 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 185 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2019 · most notably Cheryl Bessette for Herself and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Avco Financial Services Inc (2000), In Re: Stephen J. Jamo
23 federal appellate · 7 district · 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
Applies 11 U.S.C. § 106 · 11 U.S.C. § 524 · 26 U.S.C. § 7430
Relies on Chambers v. Nasco, Inc. · United States v. Nordic Village, Inc. · State v. Simpson · Equitable Life Assurance Society v. Sublett · Jove Engineering, Inc. v. Internal Revenue Service
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 185 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“... the commencement or continuation of an action, the employment of process, or an act, to collect, recover or offset any such debt as a personal liability of the debtor, whether or not discharge of such debt is waived.”
19 later decisions quote this exact passage“The court may issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title. No provision of this title providing for the raising of an issue by a party in interest shall be construed to preclude the court from, sua sponte, taking any action or making any determination necessary or appropriate to enforce or implement court orders or rules, or to prevent an abuse of process.”
13 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he movant must prove that the creditor (1) knew the discharge injunction was applicable and (2) intended the actions which violated the injunction.”
7 later decisions quote this exact passage
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.