Case law

In Re Bilzerian

258 B.R. 850 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 16, 2001

In December of 1995, Overseas Holding Limited Partnership, a Nevada limited partnership (“OHLP”) was established. … Clearly, the only reason this ease was filed was because of the SEC’s collection efforts.

Celotex Corp. v. AIU Insurance (In Re Celotex Corp.)

251 B.R. 163 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 20, 2000

This language clearly distinguishes an authorization of costs for solely a sanctionable event. … This Court finds that categories of allowable costs will not be limited by 28 U.S.C. § 1920 , so long as the prevailing parties may qualify under another section of Title 11 for the authorization of costs, i.e. expense categories

In Re Mootosammy

387 B.R. 291 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 31, 2008

LWT, as the objecting party, has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the debtors’ exemptions are not properly claimed. Fed. R. … Although statutory provisions certainly can affect an automatic waiver, 8 LWT has failed to show that Section 222.061 qualifies as such a statutory waiver.

Gonzalez v. Anthony (In re Anthony)

538 B.R. 145 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 17, 2015

Conversely, the defendant argues that the entire context of the conversation clearly shows that the plaintiff is not implicated by the defendant but is instead exonerated. … A conspiracy, i.e., an agreement, to commit a tort or other wrong does not qualify. Actions taken against parties other than the claimant do not qualify. Nor does action taken by someone other than the debtor qualify.

Weissing v. Gerring (In Re G & R Builders, Inc.)

123 B.R. 654 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 21, 1990

These funds were clearly reachable by creditors, as evidenced by the fact that the Mitchells have served the Gerrings with a writ of garnishment directing the Gerrings to pay the funds in question to the Mitchells. … As a result, this Court is satisfied that the funds deposited in Hal Gerring’s checking account are not trust property and thus are not immunized from the claims of the Trustee by virtue of 11 U.S.C. § 541 (d).

In re Pereau

40 B.R. 500 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 13, 1984

There can be no doubt of when Amoco first learned of the debtor’s having filed bankruptcy nor can Amoco argue that the debtor’s conduct was in any way qualified or ambiguous. … The question of whether the debtor failed to give Amoco timely payments of amounts due does not appear to contain a notice problem but clearly raises issues of whether a material default existed and, assuming that it did,

In Re Jacksonville Riverfront Development, Ltd.

215 B.R. 239 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 10, 1997

a plan with a reasonable possibility of confirmation, or commences payments to creditors whose claims are secured by the subject real estate. 11 U.S.C. § 362 (d)(3) (emphasis added). 5 This Court finds that Congress has clearly … The Court is conscious of the fact that the instant case does not qualify as a “single asset real estate" case as defined under the Bankruptcy Code because the debtor's secured debts exceed $4,000,000.

In Re Newport Creamery, Inc.

265 B.R. 614 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 14, 2001

It is not qualified to do business in the state of Florida. The petition filed in this case lists the street address of the Debtor as: 208 W. Main Road, Middleton, Rhode Island. … Clearly the assets used in the Debtor’s restaurant operations are its “principal” assets, rather than its 55 percent interest in a recently acquired real estate project.

In re Lowery

272 B.R. 317 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 10, 2001

In determining whether a moving party has met its burden of establishing that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, a court must draw inferences from the … The burden is on Cadle to show there is no genuine dispute that policies 2 and 6 do not qualify as exempt pursuant to § 222.14 and that there is no genuine dispute that the cash surrender value of policy 1 resulted from a

In Re Graffy

233 B.R. 894 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · May 10, 1999

Considering the standards established for determining the reasonableness of fees as set forth in Grant v. George Schumann Tire & Battery Co., 908 F.2d 874 (11th Cir.1990); Norman v. … This Court finds either of these two motives would clearly qualify as an "improper purpose” under Rule 9011. 7 .

In Re Landry

268 B.R. 301 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 17, 2001

On June 5, 2001, the Court heard evidence on what constitutes a reasonable fee *304 to pay a bankruptcy petition preparer for preparing bankruptcy pleadings in a consumer Chapter 7 bankruptcy case and to establish guidelines … Rather, a qualified bankruptcy petition preparer who performs tasks within the guidelines of Section 110 of the Bankruptcy Code should spend no more than one and one-half hours on the allowed secretarial tasks.

In re DeMarco

258 B.R. 480 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 6, 1999

In the early 1990’s, Nancy Burton apparently determined that Tri-D could obtain certain contractual or bidding advantages if it qualified as a “minority” company, or a company with the majority of its ownership held by women … If it is established that the individual is a “responsible person,” the burden shifts to the individual to prove that his conduct was not “willful.”

In Re Palm Investments of Pinellas County, Inc.

2 B.R. 646 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Feb 12, 1980

However, the ultimate burden of establishing the validity of a claim is on the claimant who must convince the Court by a fair preponderance of the evidence, Rasmussen v. … In this connection it is important to point out that some of the original stockholders of Valleydale who were clearly privy to the transactions between Palm and Valleydale were never called as witnesses and there was no showing

In Re Mandalay Shores Cooperative Housing Ass'n

22 B.R. 202 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 13, 1982

that in spite of numerous and vigorous, albeit, unsuccessful attempts, first on an administrative level and later in the various courts, it never had a chance to succeed simply because HUD refused to consider MSCHA as a qualified … Since the Court is clearly not “a party in interest,” it may not, on its own motion, order the appointment of a trustee under this Section. In re Gurwitch, 6 BCD 264 (Bkrtcy S.D.Fla.1980).

Meininger v. Burnworth (In re Kaye)

268 B.R. 301 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 17, 2001

On June 5, 2001, the Court heard evidence on what constitutes a reasonable fee *304 to pay a bankruptcy petition preparer for preparing bankruptcy pleadings in a consumer Chapter 7 bankruptcy case and to establish guidelines … Rather, a qualified bankruptcy petition preparer who performs tasks within the guidelines of Section 110 of the Bankruptcy Code should spend no more than one and one-half hours on the allowed secretarial tasks.

In Re Harloff

247 B.R. 523 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 29, 2000

This record leaves no doubt that the Order confirming the Joint Plan specifically deals with the claim of Textron and clearly provides that the return of the equipment shall be deemed to be a full and complete satisfaction … This section grants first priority to claims which qualify as cost of administration under Section 503.

Bruno v. Mona Lisa at Celebration, LLC (In Re Mona Lisa at Celebration, LLC)

436 B.R. 179 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 5, 2010

As such, plaintiffs have failed to establish the second and third prongs of the Howey test. … Although paragraph 13 of the Original Purchase Agreements also limits the purchaser’s remedies and requires them to waive any claim for specific performance or damages, clearly plaintiffs may still maintain their breach of

Braniff, Inc. v. Sundstrand Data Control, Inc. (In Re Braniff, Inc.)

154 B.R. 773 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 8, 1993

See In re Homes of Port Charlotte Florida, Inc., supra at 491 (“Even though the payments prior to the preference period were generally later than the invoice terms, clearly, the dealings between the parties changed during … 547(c)(4) are well established.

Hounsom v. United States

325 B.R. 319 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · May 13, 2005

Hounsom did not qualify for Chapter 13 because at the time her petition was filed she had noncontingent, liquidated, unsecured debts in excess of the $290,525 statutory maximum. (B.R. 69 at 5). The court dismissed Ms. … “Findings of fact, whether based on oral or documentary evidence, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the bankruptcy court to judge the credibility of the witnesses

Crews v. First Colony Life Insurance (In Re Barker)

168 B.R. 773 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 3, 1994

Clearly, Barker was concerned about an investment in stocks that was losing money, with losses in the amount of $1,400.00. … This type of cat-and-mouse pre-bankruptcy planning hinders and delays all creditors involved and is clearly prohibited by the Code. 3.