Rushing v. United States (In Re Rushing)

How courts have described this case

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

• noting had Ninth Circuit adopted Hindenlang, it would not have also considered debtor's intent or whether submissions were filed under penalty of perjury
• adopts Savage’s “on its face” language; arguably overruled by Hatton, supra

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).