Citation network
Hamilton Vs. Lanning
Cites for this judgment
- US Supreme Court
- Jun 07, 2010
Citation network · 7-day free trial
Brief every cited case in minutes
Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.
- 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
- Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
- Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
- Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases
No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account
-
Syllabus October Term, 2009 Hamilton V. LanningSearch
-
See Asgrow Seed Co. v. WinterboerSearch
-
Travelers Casualty & Surety Co. of America v. PacificSearch
-
Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, and Sotomayor, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion. Hamilton v. LanningSearch
-
Opinion of the Court Hamilton V. LanningSearch
-
Supreme Court of the United States No. 08-998 Jan Hamilton, Chapter 13 Trustee, Petitioner V. StephanieSearch
-
flow from a license take into account anticipated events that may change past trends. See, e.g. , Tellabs, Inc. v. MakorSearch
-
Innovair Aviation, Ltd. v. UnitedSearch
-
Lamie v. UnitedSearch
-
see also Grogan v. GarnerSearch
-
is substantially higher than the income that the debtor predictably will receive during the plan period. See Kawaauhau v. GeigerSearch
-
Brief any citation in this list with AI Studio
-
s compliance with the good-faith requirement). Accord, Neufeld v. FreemanSearch
-
See also Education Assistance Corp. v. ZellnerSearch
-
This is no help to debtors like respondent, whose income has changed but whose expenses are constant. Hamilton v. LanningSearch
-
Scalia, J., Dissenting Hamilton V. LanningSearch
-
with pre-BAPCPA practice not only does not recommend it, see e.g. , Pennsylvania Dept. of Public Welfare v. DavenportSearch
-
reading resulted in undesirable outcomes, that would make no difference. Lewis v. ChicagoSearch
-
The second premise is correct, but the first is not. Congress does not pursue its purposes at all costs. Rodriguez v. UnitedSearch
-
which outcomes are mistaken. And by refusing to hold that Congress meant what it said, but see Connecticut Nat. Bank v. GermainSearch
-
In re Myers , 491 F. 3d 120, 125 (CA3 2007), and Neufeld v. FreemanSearch
-
Trustee, Petitioner V. StephanieSearch
-
Tellabs, Inc. v. MakorSearch
-
See Kawaauhau v. GeigerSearch
-
Accord, Neufeld v. FreemanSearch
-
Education Assistance Corp. v. ZellnerSearch
-
Pennsylvania Dept. of Public Welfare v. DavenportSearch
-
Lewis v. ChicagoSearch
-
Rodriguez v. UnitedSearch
-
and Neufeld v. FreemanSearch
AI Brief on cited cases - 7-day free trial