United States v. Richards’s Empirical Analysis
994 F.2d 763 · 1993
Citation profile
16 federal appellate · 6 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 77 later decisions — most recently January 2014 · most notably West v. United States (1993), Rogers v. Corrosion Products, Inc. (1995)
16 federal appellate · 6 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 United States v. Energy Resources Co. · Western Real Estate Fund Inc Landsing Diversified Properties-II v. First National Bank and Trust Company of Tulsa · Brickley v. United States (In Re Brickley) · Abel v. West
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 77 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[b]y suspending the 240-day period during the debtor’s first bankruptcy ease, the bankruptcy court ensured that the government was not deprived of the full benefit of the 240 days within which it could pursue its post-assessment collection efforts. This use of the equitable authority in 11 U.S.C. § 105 (a) is not inconsistent with any specific provision of the Bankruptcy Code, and, in our view, is consistent with the underlying philosophy of the Bankruptcy Code.... The Bankruptcy Court’s order suspending the 240-day period while [the debtor] was in his first bankruptcy fulfills and preserves Congress’s intent to afford the government certain time periods to pursue collection efforts, and at the same time prevents the debtor from avoiding priority by prolonging the initial bankruptcy proceeding. During [the debtor’s] first bankruptcy, the government was prevented by the automatic stay provided for in 11 U.S.C. § 362 (a) (Supp.1992) from attempting to collect, and it would seem to follow that the 240-day period should not run while [the debtor] was in his first bankruptcy and the government was under the automatic stay.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“(a) The following expenses and claims have priority in the following order: (7) Seventh, allowed unsecured claims of governmental units, only to the extent that such claims are for— (E) an excise tax on— (i) a transaction occurring before the date of the filing of the petition for which a return, if required, is last due, under applicable law or under any extension, after three years before the date of the filing of the petition.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“(a) 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.”
4 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.