In Re LaPlana

How courts have described this case

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

• refusing to consider changes in circumstances ignores the term “projected”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Pak v. eCast Settlement Corp. (In Re Pak)
  Ninth Circuit· 2007-11-07· cited 44×
• In Re Arsenault
  M.D. Florida· 2007-07-03· cited 20×
• In Re Wilson
  M.D. North Carolina· 2008-03-03· cited 18×
• In Re Berger
  M.D. Georgia· 2007-06-11· cited 16×
• In Re Ross
  N.D. Illinois· 2007-09-13· cited 13×
• Matos v. Rivera (In re Matos)
  First Circuit· 2012-09-26· cited 13×
• In Re Phillips
  D. Massachusetts· 2008-02-07· cited 11×
• eCast Settlement Corp. v. May (In Re May)
  W.D. Pennsylvania· 2008-01-28· cited 10×
• In Re Bardo
  M.D. Pennsylvania· 2007-09-07· cited 9×
• In Re Bernard
  D. Massachusetts· 2008-11-20· cited 6×
• In re Duarte
  E.D. New York· 2011-07-12· cited 6×
• In Re Moffet
  N.D. Iowa· 2011-03-31· cited 5×
• In re Ramos
  D. Puerto Rico· 2013-06-04· cited 5×
• In Re Neclerio
  S.D. Florida· 2008-08-20· cited 4×
• In Re Stimac
  E.D. Wisconsin· 2007-03-29· cited 4×
• In Re Carrasco
  M.D. Florida· 2008-06-19· cited 2×
• In Re Raulerson
  M.D. Florida· 2008-09-09· cited 2×
• In Re Rice
  M.D. Florida· 2010-12-23· cited 2×
• In re Diaz
  W.D. Texas· 2018-05-14· cited 2×
• Stacks v. Davey (In re Stacks)
  N.D. Georgia· 2018-08-15· cited 2×