Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 24 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from White v. Stump.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | White v. Stump Anchor | green | “property a debtor -7- 1 claims as exempt will be excluded from the bankruptcy estate 2 'unless a party in interest' objects.” | 4 |
| 2 | Gonzales v. Davis (In Re Davis) | green | “has the burden of proving that the 23 exemptions are not properly claimed.” | 4 |
| 3 | In Re Ogle | green | “creditors' 18 interests are protected . . ., as the legislature designed, by the 19 limitation that only 100,000 in equity in the property may be 20 claimed as exempt.” | 4 |
| 4 | In Re Ogle | green | “the land on -10- 1 which the dwelling and appurtenant buildings are situated and by 2 which the same are surrounded or improved,” | 4 |
| 5 | In Re Millsap | green | “the 17 johns' real estate in juliaetta, latah county, idaho, consists of 18 three contiguous parcels.” | 4 |
| 6 | In re Johns | green | “the stipulated facts show 3 debtors use appurtenant buildings on parcels ii and iii and the 4 land that encompasses the same as part of their homestead, 5 primarily to pasture and care for their horses.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.