In Re Smith

How courts have described this case

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

• “[N]othing prevents a secured creditor from consenting to the modification of its claim.”
• plan that did not satisfy requirements of code could be confirmed if secured creditor has accepted the plan

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• In Re Wofford
  W.D. Wisconsin· 2011-05-23· cited 5×
• Heritage Bank v. Woodward (In re Woodward)
  Eighth Circuit· 2015-08-13· cited 5×
• In re Sellers
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 2016-08-03· cited 5×
• In re Mayberry
  D. Massachusetts· 2013-01-11· cited 3×
• Heritage Bank v. Suzette Woodward
  Eighth Circuit· 2015-08-13