Case law

Coated Sales, Inc. v. First Eastern Bank, N.A. (In Re Coated Sales, Inc.)

144 B.R. 663 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 16, 1992

A: Well, consultants specifically write these reports and qualify themselves so they don’t have to answer that question. Q: Okay. … The evidence established at trial suggests that the writedown of the Westmont inventory was appropriate.

Odebrecht Engenharia E Construcao S.A. and Adriana Henry Meirelles

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Apr 21, 2025

These parties are clearly essential to the implementation of the RJ Plan, which is being supervised by a Brazilian court. … “By establishing explicit boundaries, Congress allowed relief that does not exceed those boundaries . . . .

Genever Holdings LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 1, 2021

selection of a Qualified Buyer and Qualified Offer, and successful and backup offers for the sale of the Residence, subject to Bankruptcy Court approval with right of objection by Bravo Luck and PAX. … The Engagement Letter also clearly limits Ms.

Tese-Milner v. Moon (In Re Moon)

385 B.R. 541 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Apr 23, 2008

Paul that she had seen a bankruptcy attorney “to get information about whether she qualified for bankruptcy....” 3 The Debtor was “very unclear” on whether she had actually initiated the filing of a bankruptcy petition on … Paul asks the Court to do exactly that which the Second Circuit has explicitly forbidden — to achieve under the cloak of “equitable discretion” what the Code’s unambiguous language clearly prohibits.

Grabis v. Navient Solutions, LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Dec 11, 2020

(“Judge Morris is clearly the voice of the court in matters related to dischargeability of student loans[.]”) … This activity is relevant due to the 501 c 3 IRS law that determines non-qualified vs. qualified student loan debt. AP ECF No. 294. Denied.

In re Futterman

602 B.R. 465 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Apr 24, 2019

Article IX clearly states that its terms do not apply when a disposition of collateral occurs pursuant to another statute, which is what happened here. See N.Y.U.C.C. § 9-109. … The Court agrees that proof of such deliberately wrongful conduct would establish a defense to RWN's deficiency claim.

Airlines Reporting Corp. v. Vinogradova (In Re Vinogradova)

270 B.R. 159 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Nov 16, 2001

ARC maintains an agency list of persons and entities qualified to serve as travel agents and to issue ARC traffic documents. … Section II is clearly not applicable to a transfer of 100% interest in an ARC-approved agency.

In Re AppliedTheory Corp.

312 B.R. 225 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jul 14, 2004

“Because the presumption in bankruptcy cases is that the debtor’s limited resources will be equally distributed among his creditors, statutory priorities are narrowly construed.” 56 And relying on long established Supreme … Even more clearly, the claimed right fails to meet Bildisco’s requirements, which limit the estate’s exposure to “the reasonable value of those services.”

In re Asbestos Corporation Limited

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 3, 2026

protection as embodying “three basic principles: ‘the just treatment of all holders of 3 The Court notes that the Asbestos Claims Bar Date Order applies to persons who have been diagnosed with symptoms or an injury that qualifies … There are aspects of the claims process that the Court does not believe have been clearly communicated to asbestos claimants and potential asbestos claimants which were mentioned at the hearing on the Motion.

Bayerische Hypo-Und Vereinsbank AG v. Banca Nazionale Del Lavoro, S.P.A. (In Re Enron Corp.)

292 B.R. 752 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · May 16, 2003

“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.” … These sophisticated parties drafted contract language that clearly defined their rights. The parties expressly excluded all other obligations.

Ditech Holding Corporation

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Nov 23, 2024

Apr. 9, 2012) (explaining plaintiff did not establish the servicer received a QWR where plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts showing that it contained the required information under § 2605(e)). … Nov. 9, 2004) (dismissing a RESPA QWR claim in part because “[i]n his amended complaint, plaintiff never claims that he sent defendant a qualified written request”).

Flaxer v. Gifford (In re Lehr Construction Corp.)

528 B.R. 598 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Apr 3, 2015

Taken as true, these facts must establish “more than a sheer possibility that a defendant has acted unlawfully.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 677 , 129 S.Ct. 1937 , 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009). … But the Today’s Destiny decision does not discuss the role of the closer in the sales department and why such an individual would qualify as an insider.

Dibbern v. Adelphia Communications Corp. (In Re Adelphia Communications Corp.)

325 B.R. 89 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · May 3, 2005

In fact, each notice in the billing statements clearly and accurately stated that BST-only subscribers no longer needed to rent cable boxes. D. … Similarly, Massachusetts law also allows an accounting if the financial accounts are very complicated- — -but transactions between the plaintiff and Adelphia certainly could not qualify as such.

Yao v. Kao

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Feb 6, 2020

Still, in chapter 7 cases, the determination whether a debt qualifies as a domestic support obligation or a different type of obligation resulting from a divorce or separation “is of no consequence, as all of these debts … Section 553, moreover, does not expand nonbankruptcy rights and clearly provides that the automatic stay provisions of section 362 limit post-petition setoff rights, requiring creditors to obtain court permission before

Purewal v. Estate of Kanwaldeep Kalsi

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 3, 2022

established in the Bankruptcy Code. … “In order to qualify as a domestic support obligation, all four requirements must be satisfied.” Romano v. Romano (In re Romano), 548 B.R. 39, 46 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2016).

Kanwaldeep Singh Kalsi

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 3, 2022

established in the Bankruptcy Code. … “In order to qualify as a domestic support obligation, all four requirements must be satisfied.” Romano v. Romano (In re Romano), 548 B.R. 39, 46 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2016).

In re Old Carco LLC

538 B.R. 674 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Oct 8, 2015

After quoting from paragraph 35 of the Sale Order, which unambiguously immunized New Chrysler from successor liability, District Judge McMahon phrased the question in the following way: “whether the rights the dealers seek … Retroactivity Indiana (but not Illinois) contends that case law may be applied retroactively in limited circumstances and the three-part test established in Chevron Oil Co. v.

Frontier Communications Corporation

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Dec 1, 2023

Malibu”) held copyrights to a vast library of adult content, and was notorious for using such subpoenas to (1) identify individual users via their IP address and (2) seek “quick, out-of-court settlements” using tactics “clearly … Without a subpoena, ISPs who qualify as “cable operators” under 47 U.S.C. § 522(5), such as Frontier, are “effectively prohibited by 47 U.S.C. § 551(c) from disclosing the identities of [Subscribers] to [Movie Company Claimants

Cohen v. Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc. (In Re Drexel Burnham Lambert Group, Inc.)

138 B.R. 687 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Feb 26, 1992

It establishes a new twilight world of performance and breach with no statutory time limits on assumption or rejection and no court control. Id. … In either case, however, the estate clearly benefits by rejecting its contract with Cohen.

In Re General Growth Properties, Inc.

412 B.R. 122 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · May 14, 2009

definition, such rights offering shall be deemed to be a Qualified Rights Offering for all purposes except that the Qualified Rights Offering Price Per Share in such case shall be deemed to be equal to the lowest price per … ) of Common Stock obtained by the General Partner and/or its Affiliates in a Qualified Rights Offering from any Qualified Backstop Party or any other purchaser in such rights offering and (ii) the POR reorganization value