Case law

David Mark Spencer and Ylva Sofi Rogler

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Nov 14, 2020

Debtors argue that the entire Claim is contingent because liability has not yet been established in the State Court case. … However, a debt does not qualify as contingent merely because the debtor disputes liability or has counterclaims or defenses to the underlying claim. See, e.g., In re Clark, 91 B.R. 570, 575 (Bankr. D.

In Re Dunning

269 B.R. 357 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 3, 2001

The Motion was dated May 10, 2001 and the original as filed with the Court is clearly signed by the debtor. [Docket #6]. … To establish a recoupment situation, the Bank concedes that it would have to establish that its actions arose “out of the same transaction as that of the Debtor’s claim.” Id.

In Re Parkview Hospital-Osteopathic Medical Center

211 B.R. 603 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · May 2, 1997

These charges were clearly not incurred by the estate as mandated by Section 503(b)(l)(B)(i). Northeastern Ohio, 126 B.R. at 515 . … If found to be such, these taxes would clearly be the result of transactions of the debtor in possession.

In Re T.P. Long Chemical, Inc.

45 B.R. 278 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 3, 1985

Clearly BancOhio did not receive any benefit in this traditional sense. The auction at which its collateral was sold occurred before the E.P.A. commenced its removal action. … The court has found that the costs incurred by the E.P.A. qualify as an administrative expense.

Cafferty v. Blackmar

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 24, 2021

Plaintiff’s amended complaint clearly invokes both § 548 of the Bankruptcy Code and Ohio Revised Code Chapter 1336 as statutory bases for avoiding the alleged fraudulent transfer of the BMW. [Doc. # 21, ¶ 1]. … Under the Ohio UFTA, avoidance of an actually or constructively fraudulent transfer is permitted up to four years after the date upon which such qualifying transfer occurs.

Republic Technologies International, LLC v. Maley (In re Republic Technologies International, LLC)

283 B.R. 483 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 20, 2002

he was discharged, (3) that he was qualified for the position, and (4) that he was replaced by, or that his discharge permitted the retention of, a person not belonging to the protected class. … Genaro clearly requires individual actions or a course of conduct on the part of the supervisor or manager that rises to the level of discrimination before a plaintiff can claim against that supervisor or manager individually

Lowery v. Iftiu

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2019

In addition, [the court] will look to the plain and ordinary meaning of the language used in the contract unless another meaning is clearly apparent from the contents of the agreement. … Defendant-Debtor argues that Plaintiffs cannot establish that his misrepresentations caused the damages Plaintiffs allege.

Buckeye Retirement Co. v. Hake (In Re Hake)

387 B.R. 490 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 21, 2008

Hake (“Debtor”) and Mary Ann Hake (collectively, “Debtors”) initially filed a chapter 11 case on March 25, 2004 1 because their debts exceeded the limit to qualify for a chapter 13 filing. … “[I]t is well settled that exceptions to discharge should be limited to those clearly expressed in the Code, with exceptions not expressly included being excluded by implication.” Patterson Dental Co. v.

Murrell v. U.S. Department of Education

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 22, 2019

According to the affidavit of Collin Yanez, litigation specialist at ECMC, Plaintiff’s household size of two and adjusted gross income of $32,893.00 could qualify him for monthly student loan payments between $63-$94 under … Anderson clearly states that the allocation of the substantive evidentiary standard of proof is a factor that the court should consider in deciding whether to grant summary judgment. 477 U.S. at 252-255, 106 S.Ct. at 2512

In Re Wingerter

376 B.R. 221 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 1, 2007

CONCLUSION Apparently lost in the fast-paced world of selling and purchasing bankruptcy *239 claims has been attention to compliance with long-established bankruptcy procedures for filing proofs of claim. … B-Line does not argue that the Covenant Computer File constitutes a business record under Federal Rule of Evidence 803(6), presumably because there is no "custodian or other qualified witness” to testify that the *236 information

McGraw v. Liberty Airlines, Inc. (In Re Bell & Beckwith)

89 B.R. 632 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 28, 1988

Ayling failed to properly escrow at least Seventy-five Thousand (75,-000) shares would clearly be material violation under Ohio Law, if proved. Mr. … Looking at the evidence in the light most favorable to the Defendants, the Trustee has not conclusively established that the shares were can-celled prior to the closing of the offer on February 1, 1988. Mr.

Parkcliffe Development LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 28, 2025

(“the Final Bid Deadline”) The identity of all bidders will be made public if a Qualified Breakup Bid is received, but only the lowest Qualified Breakup Bid will be made public on December 12, 2024. … And yet, the case law demonstrates that even with auction sales, finality can be fluid, and bids that were clearly late have been accepted over the objections of timely bidders.

L. Bryan Carr Co. LPA v. Coger

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 7, 2025

Neither party submitted affidavits nor the written contract (if one exists) establishing the terms of the 401(k) Agreement. … §1056(d)(1), 26 U.S.C. §401(a)(13), and 26 C.F.R. §1.401(a)-13(b)(1) all qualify as “applicable non-bankruptcy law”, preventing ERISA qualified retirement plans, like the one in issue here, from becoming property of the

Hutsell v. Allied Interstate

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 19, 2020

COVID-19 fatality rates increase with age and underlying health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, diabetes, and immune compromise.” Wilson v. … Oyler, 397 F.3d at 386 (debtor failed second Brunner prong because he had experience and education to qualify for higher-paying work yet voluntarily chose to work as a pastor of a small church).

Zaremba v. Federal Insurance (In Re Continental Capital Investment Services, Inc.)

439 B.R. 111 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 30, 2010

At issue in Hood was whether a state’s sovereign immunity prohibited a bankruptcy court’s in rem jurisdiction to determine the dischargeability of a student loan debt. Id. … Those reports clearly trace each customer claim payment as having been made from the Berthel Proceeds, not the Chubb Proceeds, including the $210,000 payment made after this proceeding was commenced.

Macejko v. Laconi

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 18, 2024

A Plaintiff moving for summary judgment must establish all essential elements supporting its claim in this fashion; a defendant must establish that any one (or more) essential elements of Plaintiff’s claim fails, or establish … To qualify as a bona fide purchaser in Ohio, a buyer must meet several criteria. “[A] bona fide purchase involves three elements, (1) a valuable consideration, (2) good faith and (3) absence of notice.”

Harchar v. United States (In Re Harchar)

393 B.R. 160 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 14, 2008

Schulman (In re Freeman), 86 F.3d 478, 481-82 (6th Cir.1996) (tax refund, even though exempt under state law, qualifies as disposable income). … CONCLUSION In the end, it is the Debtors’ burden to establish the existence of a stay violation.

In Re White Motor Credit Corp.

50 B.R. 885 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 24, 1985

Zingale is a former Judge who is well qualified for his appointed role and contributed immeasurably to resolving numerous, difficult claims. … These charges are clearly non-compensable when considering substantial contribution.

Jarrett Nathan Tapp

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jul 10, 2020

Without exposition, the First Circuit declared “emotional damages qualify as “actual damages” under § 362(h).” Fleet Mortgage Group, Inc. v. Kaneb, 196 F.3d 265, 269 (1st Cir. 1999). … “To recover “actual” damages for emotional distress under § 362(k), a plaintiff must (1) suffer significant emotional distress, (2) clearly establish the significant emotional distress, and (3) demonstrate a causal connection

Robert Clyde Zimpher and Marilyn Kay Zimpher

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Sep 27, 2019

However, recent Supreme Court decisions clearly state that the Bankruptcy Code’s provisions limit a bankruptcy court’s equitable powers. See, Law v. … In short, the funds were returned and are property of the bankruptcy estate, subject to the Chapter 7 distribution priorities established by §726(a).