In Re Copeland

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding, under Arkansas law, that even though section 1.203 “does not require a finding as a matter of law that a transaction is a true lease based only on the fact the lessee may terminate the lease at any time,” this fact precluded finding that transaction was sale
• true lease versus disguised security interest dispute litigated in context of contested Chapter 13 confirmation proceeding

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Excel Auto & Truck Leasing, L.L.P. v. Alief Independent School District
  Tex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2007-08-31· cited 16×
• Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Hoskins (In Re Hoskins)
  W.D. Missouri· 2001-08-27· cited 8×
• Cook Sales, Inc. v. Shores (In Re Shores)
  M.D. Florida· 2005-10-19· cited 7×
• Westship, Inc. v. Trident Shipworks, Inc.
  M.D. Florida· 2000-04-11· cited 7×
• In Re Minton
  W.D. Arkansas· 2001-12-11· cited 1×
• In Re Double G Trucking of the Arklatex, Inc.
  W.D. Arkansas· 2010-04-20· cited 1×
• Excel Auto and Truck Leasing, L.L.P. v. Alief Independent School District
  Tex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2007-08-31