Yoder v. United States (In Re Yoder )

How courts have described this case

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

• consolidated note was not a novation under Pennsylvania law, where consolidation note provided that it was given to consolidate, reschedule or reamortize, but not as satisfaction of prior notes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Piedmont Trust Bank v. Linkous (In Re Linkous)
  W.D. Virginia· 1992-02-14· cited 32×
• In Re Larson
  D. Colorado· 2001-03-12· cited 24×
• Lopez v. Beneficial Mutual Savings Bank (In Re Lopez)
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1987-07-22· cited 17×
• In Re Magnus
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1988-04-26· cited 16×
• Dembo v. United States, Department of the Treasury, Internal Revenue Service (In Re Dembo)
  E.D. Pennsylvania· 1991-04-22· cited 10×
• Hrncirik v. Farmers National Bank of Seymour (In Re Hrncirik)
  N.D. Texas· 1992-03-26· cited 8×
• In Re Kolsch
  D. Nevada· 1986-02-18· cited 5×
• Matter of Arpaia
  D. Connecticut· 1992-08-10· cited 4×
• In Re Heape
  D. Kansas· 1988-04-05· cited 2×
• Production Credit Ass'n of St. Cloud v. LaFond (In re LaFond)
  Eighth Circuit· 1986-05-14· cited 1×
• Unnamed case
  Eighth Circuit· 1986-05-14