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.

• “The Court finds that a plan may be confirmed without a stay in effect as to the Debtor because an effective stay is not a requirement for confirmation listed under section 1325(a).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• In Re Isaac and Jacqueline Okoreeh-Baah, Metro Employees Credit Union v. Isaac and Jacqueline Okoreeh-Baah
  Sixth Circuit· 1988-01-14· cited 135×
• In Re Paschal
  E.D. North Carolina· 2006-01-06· cited 39×
• In Re Johnson
  W.D. Tennessee· 2006-01-09· cited 38×
• Shaw v. Aurgroup Financial Credit Union
  Sixth Circuit· 2009-01-09· cited 35×
• In Re Charles
  S.D. Texas· 2005-11-04· cited 33×
• In Re Jumpp
  First Circuit· 2006-12-28· cited 33×
• In Re Jupiter
  D. South Carolina· 2006-06-21· cited 32×
• In Re Baldassaro
  D. New Hampshire· 2006-02-24· cited 31×
• Smith v. ME Bureau of Revenue Services
  First Circuit· 2018-12-12· cited 28×
• In re Bender
  E.D. New York· 2016-12-06· cited 19×
• In Re Dowden
  S.D. Ohio· 2010-03-26· cited 11×
• In Re Murphy
  S.D. New York· 2006-07-21· cited 11×
• In Re Robinson
  W.D. Michigan· 2010-04-16· cited 8×
• In Re Fleming
  D. South Carolina· 2006-06-30· cited 8×
• In Re Ford
  W.D. Tennessee· 1998-06-24· cited 4×
• Olsen v. Habitat for Humanity
  Eighth Circuit· 2007-03-09· cited 3×
• In re Wood
  D. Maryland· 2018-09-25· cited 2×