Case law

Headrick v. Atchison (In Re Atchison)

255 B.R. 790 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 29, 2000

The court of appeals found that the underlying promissory note “clearly and unambiguously [provided] that the [debtors] would be liable for [the creditor’s] attorney’s fees” as the parties had agreed. Id. at 1508 . … Accordingly, the bankruptcy court does not qualify as a “trial or appellate court” within the meaning of Section 772.11, Florida Statutes. See, e.g., Barnett Bank of Tampa, N.A. v.

Hillsborough Holdings Corp. v. United States (In re Hillsborough Holdings Corp.)

179 B.R. 728 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 3, 1995

This Court is unwilling to accept such an unwarranted gloss attempted to be placed in the undisputed facts established by this record in order to support the proposition that JWIC is qualified as a DÍSC and, in turn, entitled … The Private Letter Ruling issued by the Government on January 9,1976 established that the 10% royalty rate included in the lease qualifies for long term capital gain treatment to U.S. Pipe.

In Re Rocha

179 B.R. 305 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 27, 1995

The absolute priority rule, in its simplest terms, requires that creditors of a debtor in bankruptcy reorganization receive payment of their claims in their established order of priority, and that they receive payment in … Even though the wife would qualify as a source of outside capital for purposes of the exception, the payments were to take place on a monthly basis over the course of the Plan.

Hrachova v. Cook (In re Cook)

473 B.R. 468 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 19, 2012

obligation is defined in § 101(14A) as a debt owed to or recoverable by a spouse, former spouse, or child of the debtor, in the nature of alimony, maintenance, or support, whether or not so designated. 29 The debt must have been established … whatever support is necessary” to maintain plaintiff at or above 125 percent of the poverty level. 39 The intent of the parties in signing the Affidavit of Support, in this case as reflected in the name of the agreement, clearly

In Re Professional Security Services, Inc.

162 B.R. 901 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 4, 1993

However, the Debtor’s reliance on Critical Care is misplaced, as that case is clearly distinguishable from the instant ease. … Under the statute, an entity, i.e. a corporation, does not qualify as a person.

In Re Davis

343 B.R. 326 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · May 3, 2006

In reaching this holding, the Court reasoned that, “[petitioners’ plans clearly ‘provided for’ respondent’s home mortgage claims by establishing repayment schedules for the satisfaction of the arrearages portion of those … As the Court has found Section 1325(a)(5)(b)(iii) to be inapplicable, there is no need for the Court to reach a determination as to the parameters of what qualifies as “equal monthly payments.”

Charter Executive Center Ltd. v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (In Re Charter Executive Center Ltd.)

34 B.R. 131 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 14, 1983

Charter next contends that the United States waived sovereign immunity *136 in § 106 of the Bankruptcy Code, and therefore, is subject to a claim of usury. … It is established law that the purpose of attaching a promissory note to a mortgage is that of evidencing the underlying debt.

In Re May

261 B.R. 770 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 2, 2001

His claim of exemption as set forth in Schedule C listed the following items, which the Debtor seeks to immunize from administration: A. … The most recent amendment just before trial is clearly indicative that it was done for the purpose of increasing the deficit to establish and to show that the Debtor has no surplus from which he can fund a meaningful Chapter

In Re Cupboards, Inc.

190 B.R. 969 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 3, 1996

Although, he later qualified this statement by stating that Goff is not an employee, he just pays Goff when he performs work for him *971 such as driving to Tampa to file documents in the Bankruptcy Court. … Basically, these are the relevant facts established at the evidentiary hearing. Upon these facts, the U.S. Trustee contends it is entitled to the relief sought by the Motion.

Washburn v. United States (In Re Washburn)

290 B.R. 162 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 16, 2002

Clearly, under Hindenlang, that was not a return. … In Hat-ton, the court held that neither the SFR nor the installment agreement qualified as a “return” for the purpose of discharge-ability.

Adams Farms v. James (In re James)

166 B.R. 181 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 8, 1994

Trustee may do so, the holding of Ruhlman is clearly inapposite and no longer applicable. In the alternative, it is the contention of the Plaintiffs that based on F.R.B.P. 3003(b)(1) they have standing. … The disposition of this adversary proceeding shall not be construed as a finding determining the status of these Plaintiffs as creditors qualified to prosecute their respective claims of non-dischargeability under § 523(c

In Re Hendricks

250 B.R. 415 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 28, 2000

The parties clearly contemplated that the Judgment was a final resolution of the litigation and that M & H would assert no further claim for the underlying attorney fees other than in the event of a reversal or remand of … The totality of circumstances surrounding the Debtor’s actions in her Chapter 13 case are relevant in establishing good faith.

Shearson Lehman Hutton Mortgage Corp. v. Gierman (In Re Gierman)

106 B.R. 733 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 24, 1989

While Helgenber-ger initially protested that he could not qualify for financing, McNeely and Randall assured him that he does not have to worry about it because they would arrange the financing for this transaction. … Colwell, 193 U.S. 473 , 24 S.Ct. 505 , 48 L.Ed. 754 , 11 Am.Bankr.Rep. 568 (1904), has been overruled by this section and the Congress clearly intended to cover only deliberate and intentional wrongful acts which involves

In Re Medical Associates of Pinellas, L.L.C.

33 A.L.R. Fed. 2d 769 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 3, 2007

The Court concludes that subsection (A) of the definition of health care business in section 101(27A) requires the existence of the following four elements in order for a debtor to qualify as a “health care business”: 1. … Each of the examples included in subparagraph (B) of section 101(27A) describes businesses where patients reside, receive emergency ambulatory or surgical treatment, or receive in-home or inpatient care, and clearly includes

EPIC Aviation, LLC v. Phillips (In Re Phillips)

418 B.R. 445 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 10, 2009

However, $23,500 in payments to attorneys qualifies as a transfer outside the ordinary course of business, in an amount that is clearly material. The Debtor’s business was the charter air business, not litigation. … This statement was clearly false and material. The Plaintiff has established that there are several material omissions in the *464 Debtor’s schedules and statements.

In Re Holt

422 B.R. 778 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 14, 2010

Accord In re Conner, 172 B.R. 119, 121 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.l994)(stating that “[i]f all that is required to establish an annuity contract is a stream of payments over time, all installment contracts would qualify as an annuity … and that is clearly not what the McCollam decision requires”).

In Re Bicoastal Corp.

37 Cont. Cas. Fed. 76,074 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 23, 1991

Clearly, the principles which govern the use of Fed.R.Civ.P. 56 are equally applicable if motions for summary judgment are filed in a bankruptcy court, either in an adversary proceeding or in a contested matter. … Section 412 of CAS establishes the standard for the composition and measurement of accounting cost.

In Re George

426 B.R. 895 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 1, 2010

No. 26) to NCB’s claim contending that the claim was secured by the Property and, therefore, did not qualify as an unsecured claim. … NCB had the opportunity to establish it was or was not secured, but NCB failed to timely act.

In Re Craig

265 B.R. 624 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 15, 2001

However, a trustee and a beneficiary need not follow the strict attorney trust account procedures in order to establish a set of cognizable legal and equitable interests and rights in each other. 2. … That protection will help to ensure the continued existence of a qualified and experienced pool of Chapter 11 debtor’s attorneys. c.

In Re Ripp

176 B.R. 972 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 1, 1994

It is well established that it is the objecting party’s burden to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Debtor is not entitled to the exemption claimed. … The case of In re Drake is clearly distinguishable from the facts in this case. The case of In re Dudeney, 159 B.R. 1003 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.1993), is on point and persuasive.