In Re Ginsberg

How courts have described this case

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

• “Since the Debtor did not satisfy the credit counseling requirement imposed by Section 109(h)(1) and is not eligible for an exemption or a waiver pursuant to Section 109(h)(3) or (h)(4

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

3 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In Re Nichols
  S.D. New York· 2007-02-09· cited 12×
• In Re Dyer
  W.D. North Carolina· 2007-06-27· cited 9×
• In Re Swiatkowski
  E.D. New York· 2006-11-16

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• In Re Ross
  N.D. Georgia· 2006-02-08· cited 37×
• Hedquist v. Fokkena (In Re Hedquist)
  Eighth Circuit· 2006-04-21· cited 36×
• In Re Cleaver
  S.D. Ohio· 2005-11-17· cited 36×
• In Re Watson
  E.D. Virginia· 2005-11-03· cited 32×
• In Re Seaman
  E.D. New York· 2006-03-30· cited 31×
• In Re Rios
  S.D. New York· 2005-12-19· cited 31×
• In Re Childs
  D. Maryland· 2005-12-19· cited 25×
• In Re Hess
  D. Vermont· 2006-08-14· cited 24×
• In Re DiPinto
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2006-01-30· cited 21×
• In Re Talib
  W.D. Missouri· 2005-12-01· cited 16×
• In Re Elmendorf
  S.D. New York· 2006-07-18· cited 16×
• In Re Sosa
  W.D. Texas· 2005-12-22· cited 14×
• In Re Talib
  W.D. Missouri· 2005-12-12· cited 13×
• In Re Henderson
  E.D. New York· 2006-01-17· cited 11×
• In Re Wilson
  N.D. New York· 2006-06-05· cited 7×