Case law

In Re Crescenzi

53 B.R. 374 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 30, 1985

Congress expressed substantial concern in establishing the dollar limitations in Chapter 13. … Krohn duly qualified and is now acting as administrator c.t.a. Crescenzi also failed to comply with the February 5, 1982 order.

Gisele Bouillette Allard

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 20, 2019

The answer is clearly yes. … Jagdeep Deol qualifies as a good faith purchaser of the Lenox Property pursuant to section 363(m).

In Re Saint Vincents Catholic Med. Centers of Ny

429 B.R. 139 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · May 14, 2010

It is well established in this Circuit that even if the action is taken against a non-debtor the Court must examine the effect of the action, and if that effect “would inevitably have an adverse impact on property of the … Quincy argued that as a governmental unit, as defined in 11 U.S.C. 101(27), it is immune from the Bankruptcy removal statute 6 as well as the automatic stay.

Fairfield Sentry Limited ( In Liquidation) v. HSBC Private Bank (Suisse) SA

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jan 4, 2024

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act provides that “a foreign state shall be immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States and of the States except as provided in sections 1605 to 1607 of this chapter. … PIFSS is not clearly applicable to this situation, and Defendant’s proffered case law does not convince the Court otherwise.

In Re Aerovias Nacionales De Colombia, S.A. Avianca

323 B.R. 879 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · May 6, 2005

See In re Okura, 249 B.R. at 603 stating, “Where the intention of the parties is clearly and unambiguously set forth, effect must be given to the intent as indicated by the language used.” … It contends that this establishes the viability of its claim.

Matter of WT Grant Co.

4 B.R. 53 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Feb 20, 1980

Rodman thereafter qualified as the Trustee of the bankrupt estate and has since acted in that capacity. … Rodman qualified as the trustee in bankruptcy.

In Re Cuisine Magazine, Inc.

61 B.R. 210 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · May 28, 1986

thus feel it would be inherently unfair to impose such limitations (based on an amorphous understanding of the nature of the work Lord was to have performed) on Lord at this juncture, when such a circumscription was not clearly … A bald assertion by Lord that the billing of staff overtime is its “standard practice,” see Response of Lord ¶ 9, hardly qualifies as adequate documentation.

Genova v. ESM Realty Trust (In Re Stoll)

330 B.R. 470 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 30, 2005

The movant must establish that no material issue of fact exists. Adickes v. S.H. … Clearly, the Rosencranz court considered the debtor’s interest in the trust to be at least a potential asset of the estate that had to be disclosed to creditors and determined that the interest should have been included on

In re Johns-Manville Corp.

552 B.R. 221 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jun 30, 2016

In other words, the debtor’s liability is not yet established. … This definition clearly includes MFP.

In Re Johns-Manville Corp.

36 B.R. 727 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jan 23, 1984

Clearly, none of the justifications for declaring an abuse of the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court announced by these courts are present in the Manville case. … However, in that case, the Fifth Circuit found that not only was the debtor not insolvent, but it had paid off debts not due so as to qualify as a debtor unable to pay its current debts.

In Re Footstar, Inc.

323 B.R. 566 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Feb 16, 2005

In this case it is clearly in the debtors’ interest to assume the Agreements, and Kmart does not argue to the contrary. II. … The Report clearly addressed the very amendment adopted in 1984 and just as clearly expressed that Committee’s view as to the inapplicability of Section 365(c)(1) to a debtor in possession’s assumption. Cf.

Tronox Inc. v. Kerr McGee Corp. (In re Tronox Inc.)

503 B.R. 239 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Dec 12, 2013

There was some earlier language in the decision that fraud "must be clearly established in the record by testimony and it must appear affirmatively to a reasonable certainty that ... the conveyance was made with intent in … Although the use of language, such as "clearly established” and "to a reasonable certainty” are present in the opinion, the Lev-inson court did not expressly adopt the clear and convincing evidence standard.

In Re ACE Elevator Co., Inc.

347 B.R. 473 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jun 23, 2006

The claimed priority’s purpose needs to be clear from the statute, because “ ‘[t]o give priority to a claimant not clearly entitled thereto is not only inconsistent with the policy of equality of distribution; it dilutes … Counsel for the Trustees also acknowledged that the “health benefits and the pension benefits are based on hours worked in the year, and that's how you qualify.” Tr. at 13. 13 .

In Re SPhinX, Ltd.

351 B.R. 103 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 6, 2006

Counsel for the JOLs stated at the hearing on the Petition, however, that the investors in the SPhinX Funds could qualify as creditors for purposes of the Cayman Islands winding up proceedings. … The JOLs also point out that the SPhinX Funds clearly held themselves out in their Offering Memorandum as offshore, Cayman Islands entities.

Picard v. Merkin (In Re Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC)

440 B.R. 243 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Nov 17, 2010

In addition, this doctrine has been applied to dismiss complaints establishing only clear-cut, complete affirmative defenses such as absolute immunity or the statute of limitations; “defenses that require a factual review … Section 546(e) provides an affirmative defense that, unless clearly established on the face of the Complaint, “does not tend to contra-vert the [Trustee’s] prima facie case.” DeGirolamo v. Truck World, Inc.

Nisselson v. Empyrean Investment Fund, L.P. (In Re MarketXT Holdings Corp.)

376 B.R. 390 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Oct 12, 2007

The evidence clearly established that when Amanat signed the affidavit, he was represented by his personal counsel, that he went over the text of the affidavit with great care, and that his requested changes were all made … On the other hand, it has been clearly established that Amanat and Ash-raf each had interests in the enterprises that were ostensibly controlled by the other.

Fairfield Sentry Limited (In Liquidation) v. HSBC Securities Services (Luxembourg) SA

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jan 29, 2024

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act provides that “a foreign state shall be immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States and of the States except as provided in sections 1605 to 1607 of this chapter. … PIFSS is not clearly applicable to this situation, and Defendant’s proffered case law does not convince the Court otherwise.

In Re Asia Global Crossing, Ltd.

322 B.R. 247 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 21, 2005

Background The work-product rule is a qualified privilege codified in Rule 26(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 13 Upjohn Co. v. … Once established, the privilege cannot be waived without the consent of all of the parties that share it. John Morrell & Co. v.

Frontier Communications Corporation

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 27, 2024

emerged from common law principles and are well established in the law.” … a tight leash is not required to establish liability.

Wyandotte Industries v. E.Y. Neill & Co. (In Re First Hartford Corp.)

63 B.R. 479 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jul 28, 1986

Here, neither of the required showings to establish such a warranty has been made. Clearly, the sending of a sample of the wool to FHC and its acceptance by FHC is at odds with the wholly unsupported claim that E.Y. … Defendant's contention that the telexes fall within the purview of the business records exception of Fed.R.Evid. 803(6) is meritless because of defendant’s failure to prove through the testimony of a qualified witness that