In Re Cummins

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the Court need not address the second and third prongs of Section 1328(b) following a finding that debtors failed to satisfy their burden of establishing the first prong
• noting that the “three subsections of 1328(b) are to be read in the conjunctive”
• “A review of the few cases considering whether circumstances are beyond the debtor's control discloses that hardship discharges are rarely granted other than in the case of a debtor's death.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In re Engen
  D. Kansas· 2016-12-13· cited 12×
• In re Shorter
  E.D. Arkansas· 2015-10-23· cited 5×

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• In Re White
  N.D. Illinois· 1991-04-16· cited 20×
• In Re Bond
  E.D. North Carolina· 1984-01-06· cited 13×
• In Re Dark
  N.D. Ohio· 1988-07-01· cited 13×
• In Re Graham
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1986-07-24· cited 8×
• In Re Schleppi
  S.D. Ohio· 1989-09-19· cited 8×
• In Re Nelson
  N.D. Illinois· 1991-12-27· cited 8×
• In Re McNealy
  S.D. Ohio· 1983-07-29· cited 8×