In Re Green

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that BAPCPA rendered § 1325(b) “a murky stew of conflicting judicial opinions about the plain language meaning of common words and phrases contained in the statute itself and the Congressional intent behind it”
• the plain meaning interpretation would allow debtors to not pay when they could and would prevent confirmation when a debtor has had a decrease in income; this creates problems on both ends
• “[I]f the interpretation of ‘projected disposable income’ is not to degenerate into absurdity, deriving ‘projected disposable income’ from ‘disposable income’ must be subject to the presentation of contrary evidence before confirmation of a debtor’s chapter 13 plan.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

17 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Coop v. Frederickson (In Re Frederickson)
  Eighth Circuit· 2008-10-27· cited 97×
• Baud v. Carroll
  Fifth Circuit· 2011-02-04· cited 69×
• Ana Flores v. Rod Danielson
  Ninth Circuit· 2013-08-29· cited 43×
• In Re Williams
  D. Colorado· 2008-09-12· cited 40×
• In Re Paley
  N.D. New York· 2008-06-03· cited 25×
• Musselman v. eCast Settlement Corp. (In Re Musselman)
  E.D. North Carolina· 2008-09-30· cited 21×
• In Re Wilson
  M.D. North Carolina· 2008-03-03· cited 18×
• In Re Davis
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2008-07-22· cited 16×
• In Re Rush
  W.D. Missouri· 2008-04-24· cited 11×
• In re Ramos
  D. Puerto Rico· 2013-06-04· cited 5×
• In Re Wing
  D. Colorado· 2010-09-09· cited 4×
• In Re Marchionna
  N.D. Ohio· 2008-08-25· cited 3×
• In Re Ellis
  D. Massachusetts· 2008-06-10· cited 2×
• In Re McLain
  N.D. New York· 2007-10-24· cited 1×
• In re Ballew
  E.D. North Carolina· 2013-01-11· cited 1×
• Richard Baud v. Krispen S. Carroll
  Sixth Circuit· 2011-02-04
• David D. Coop v. Craig Frederickson
  Eighth Circuit· 2008-10-27

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Lamie v. United States Trustee
  Supreme Court· 2004-01-26· cited 1,956×
• In Re Hardacre
  N.D. Texas· 2006-03-06· cited 214×
• In Re Alexander
  E.D. North Carolina· 2006-06-30· cited 153×
• In Re Jass
  D. Utah· 2006-03-22· cited 142×
• In Re Farrar-Johnson
  N.D. Illinois· 2006-09-15· cited 105×
• Kibbe v. Sumski
  First Circuit· 2007-02-20· cited 103×
• In Re Barr
  M.D. North Carolina· 2006-04-05· cited 93×
• In Re Rotunda
  N.D. New York· 2006-09-01· cited 38×
• In Re Austin
  D. Vermont· 2007-08-07· cited 37×
• In Re Davis
  E.D. Michigan· 2006-08-21· cited 31×
• In Re Winokur
  E.D. Virginia· 2007-01-18· cited 24×
• Smith v. ITT Financial Services (In Re Smith)
  S.D. Indiana· 1989-05-05· cited 9×