In Re Mathis

How courts have described this case

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

• “[Section 1325(b)(1)(B) ] does not say that 36 or 60 plan payments must be made, or that the plan must remain open for any particular duration of time. If Congress wanted to require a debtor to make 36 or 60 plan payments over three or [five] years, it would have said so.”
• “[Section 1325(b)(1)(B)] does not say that 36 or 60 plan payments must be made, or that the plan must remain open for any particular duration of time. If Congress wanted to require a debtor to make 36 or 60 plan payments over three or [five] years, it would have said so.”
• “[Section 1325(b)(1)(B)] does not say that 36 or 60 plan payments must be made, or that the plan must remain open for any particular duration of time. If Congress wanted to require a debtor to make 36 or 60 plan payments over three or [five] years, it would have said so.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

12 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Baud v. Carroll
  Fifth Circuit· 2011-02-04· cited 69×
• In Re Williams
  D. Colorado· 2008-09-12· cited 40×
• Danielson v. Flores (In Re Flores)
  Ninth Circuit· 2012-08-31· cited 15×
• In Re Musselman
  E.D. North Carolina· 2007-11-30· cited 14×
• In Re Ross
  N.D. Illinois· 2007-09-13· cited 13×
• In Re Rush
  W.D. Missouri· 2008-04-24· cited 11×
• In Re Vidal
  M.D. Pennsylvania· 2009-10-12· cited 4×
• In Re McCarthy
  N.D. Texas· 2008-06-11· cited 3×
• In Re Filion
  D. Massachusetts· 2011-05-03· cited 2×
• In re Ballew
  E.D. North Carolina· 2013-01-11· cited 1×
• In re Evon
  N.D. Illinois· 2013-03-21· cited 1×
• Richard Baud v. Krispen S. Carroll
  Sixth Circuit· 2011-02-04

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• United States v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1989-02-22· cited 4,657×
• Consumer Product Safety Commission v. GTE Sylvania, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1980-06-09· cited 2,564×
• TRW Inc. v. Andrews
  Supreme Court· 2001-11-13· cited 1,407×
• In Re Alexander
  E.D. North Carolina· 2006-06-30· cited 153×
• In Re Slusher
  D. Nevada· 2007-01-17· cited 119×
• Sunahara v. Burchard (In Re Sunahara)
  Ninth Circuit· 2005-06-27· cited 75×
• In Re Fuger
  D. Utah· 2006-06-29· cited 39×
• In Re Richardson
  D. Kansas· 2002-10-08· cited 25×
• In Re Girodes
  M.D. North Carolina· 2006-09-20· cited 21×
• In Re Forte
  N.D. Illinois· 2005-10-06· cited 19×
• Miller v. Loan Star Mortgage, Inc. (In Re Miller)
  W.D. Pennsylvania· 2005-05-16· cited 17×
• Mangum v. Marshall (In Re Mangum)
  N.D. Illinois· 2006-05-18· cited 2×