Case law

Maids International, Inc. v. Ward (In Re Ward)

194 B.R. 703 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 16, 1996

Maids has developed a system for establishing and operating a household maintenance and cleaning service. … It concluded the clause qualified because it was stated to be compensation for “actual or threatened harm_” This is questionable.

In Re Table Talk, Inc.

22 B.R. 706 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 27, 1982

The new president appears well-qualified for his task. He has focused on the chief business problems in the debtor’s life, and has taken concrete steps to address them. … The legislative history clearly states the standard: the protection must be needed and the costs must not be *713 disproportionately high.

Desrosiers v. Transamerica Financial Corp. (In Re Desrosiers)

212 B.R. 716 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 24, 1997

As established above, the first element has been met. The District Court’s ruling was on the merits. See Potts v. United Techs. … Thus, there is clearly privity between ITT and Transamerica.

Ganis Corp. of California v. Jackson (In Re Jackson)

89 B.R. 308 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 12, 1988

Additionally, the marine insurance provided for the “School Master” provides: “Privilege granted for occasional charter with qualified captain in command of vessel; specifically, however, excluding charter on a per passenger … The Court notes that in In re Daboul, 85 B.R 197 (Bankr.D.Mass.1988), the court held that the burden of proof for establishing fraud in both state and bankruptcy cases was the preponderance of the evidence standard.

In Re Erewhon, Inc.

21 B.R. 79 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · May 4, 1982

Clearly, in the area of fees there are no explicit yardsticks. … attorney was not necessary and may have been over qualified for the tasks at hand.

Nickless v. Clemente (In Re Clemente)

413 B.R. 1 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 12, 2009

As noted above, see supra discussion regarding 109A § 5(a)(1), the Debtor clearly did not receive reasonably equivalent value for the transfer. … Instead, she qualified the transfer by requesting that they build an in-law apartment for her. • The Court finds that the Debtor transferred the Camden property for no consideration. See Fleet Nat’l Bank v.

Nickless v. Avnet, Inc. (In Re Century Electronics Manufacturing, Inc.)

310 B.R. 485 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 9, 2004

The court found nothing clearly inconsistent in the positions taken by the estate representative. … The “split” between the two lines of cases barely qualifies as such. As the Baker court noted, using one ap *493 proach over the other will often have no impact under the specific facts of a case.

In Re Gotham

327 B.R. 65 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 27, 2005

Got *77 ham could qualify as a wage earner. Indeed, given Mr. Gotham’s prospects, he too may have trouble in qualifying. … Gotham incurred expenses that were clearly extravagant and unnecessary. These included the luxury linens and the handbags. She testified that she is contrite about those purchases and can no longer afford the same.

United States Trustee v. Burton (In re Rosario)

493 B.R. 292 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · May 29, 2013

When asked if, after completing the form, she told Moya “that he qualified,” Santos answered “correct.” Trial Tr. 3 169:18-19. … informing him, upon completion of the means test, that he did so “qualify.”

In re Charles Street African Methodist Episcopal Church

481 B.R. 1 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 18, 2012

If either is established, the default interest provision is not enforceable. If neither is established, the clause is enforceable and the claim arising from it must be allowed. … However, the basis for these figures was not firmly established. Ms.

In Re Turner

80 B.R. 618 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 9, 1987

If the petitioners were to rely, as they clearly did, primarily upon their own claims on this question, they could hardly rely on claims for bad checks. … Additional Allegations in the Petition Turner argues that certain additional allegations in the petition were intentionally false, and that as such they establish petitioners’ bad faith.

In re Strategic Labor, Inc.

467 B.R. 11 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 5, 2012

Neither the DIP Motion nor the order referred to Balboa Capital or the IRS by name but the order clearly subordinated Infor’s security interest to their liens to the extent valid. … all, or virtually all, of a debtor’s assets, the debtor is engaged in ongoing business operations, and the debtor’s continued operations preserve or enhance the value of the secured creditor’s collateral, items that may qualify

D. Federico Co. v. New Bedford Redevelopment Authority (In Re D. Federico Co.)

8 B.R. 888 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Feb 3, 1981

S-8 qualified as proper notice under M.G.L. Ch. 30, Section 39N, in that at best, it was not timely delivered to the Authority. … Moreover, it clearly establishes that Federico knew of the contract requirements and complied with them at lest on this portion of the North Terminal project.

Carpenter v. Fanaras (In Re Fanaras)

263 B.R. 655 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 25, 2001

Clearly, under these particular circumstances, the equities favored the innocent debtor who had no ability to exercise any control over the property for over two years insofar as the trustee’s role eliminated the debtor’s … For example, in Charlesbarik, the issue was whether a civil compensatory fine for violation of an injunction by the debtor qualified as an administrative expense under Chapter 11.

Brandt v. Hicks, Muse & Co. (In Re Healthco International, Inc.)

208 B.R. 288 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 9, 1997

Obviously, Kempner and Mai fail to qualify as disinterested if they are found to have had a material financial interest in the transaction. … But the director must establish the fairness of the transaction in all instances.

Lassman v. Reilly (In Re Feeley)

429 B.R. 56 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 13, 2010

According to Costa, who was employed by Affordable Funding at the time and who obtained the Debtors’ credit report, the Debtors were not qualified to refinance their home because of their poor credit. … Plaintiff is simply proxy for the bankrupt, and this action clearly arose within the context of the underlying business contract between bankrupt and defendant’s principal....

In re Bullard

475 B.R. 304 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 24, 2012

“To claim otherwise,” the Debtor urges, “would not only go against common sense, but also negate *307 the clearly defined provisions of 506(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.” 7 With this in mind, the Debtor submits that because … by the conjunctive “and,” 48 and that 1325(b)(5) expressly provides for curing defaults and maintaining payments “on any unsecured claim or secured claim,” 49 suggesting that the secured portion of an undersecured claim qualifies

Butler v. Candlewood Road Partners, LLC (In re Raymond)

529 B.R. 455 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 17, 2015

We find no basis in the record to justify a conclusion that the court's finding was clearly erroneous. … He argues that he clearly has standing to pursue this claim because it falls within the discharge of his duties under section 704(a) of the Bankruptcy Code; that is, he is seeking to establish that the Great Neck Residence

In Re Rodrigues

370 B.R. 467 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 5, 2007

(ERISA qualified),” which he valued at $-0-, as well as an “IRA with Fidelity,” which he valued at $11,501.00. … Long revealed that “[i]n spite of the well known and clearly understood law in this area, the Suffolk *475 Probate Court ... improperly reopened the ease” and discharged,the attachment.

Mitchell v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re Mitchell)

476 B.R. 33 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 20, 2012

set forth by the First Circuit in Rodriguez, 57 F.3d at 1172 , Wells Fargo cannot be exposed to each and every sundry argument set forth by the Mitchells in their pleadings and can only be subjected to claims which are clearly … I find that Wells Fargo lacked sufficient opportunity to respond to this claim when it was not set forth clearly in the Mitchells’ complaint and was raised only superficially by them on the last page of their Rule 56(d) motion