Case law

Fulton, N.A. v. Robbins (In re Robbins)

562 B.R. 83 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 21, 2016

D.N.D. 2006) (“The language ‘obtained by clearly indicates that the fraudulent conduct occurred at the inception of the debt, i.e., the debtor committed a fraudulent act to induce the creditor to part with its money, property … respecting one's "overall financial condition that are typically used to establish- such standing.”

In Re Henry

457 B.R. 402 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 19, 2011

That market is clearly broader than a purely retail market.... … Runiewicz, is extremely well-qualified, having spent over 30 years buying and selling used cars in various capacities.

Michener v. Brady (In Re Brady)

234 B.R. 652 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 14, 1999

Here, there was clearly an attorney-client relationship between the Husband and Michener. … Clearly, the protections of the Eleventh Amendment are subject to waiver. See In re Sacred Heart Hospital of Norristown, 133 F.3d 237, 242 (3d Cir.1998).

At & T Universal Card Services Corp. v. Feld (In Re Feld)

203 B.R. 360 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 18, 1996

AT & T to qualify for the credit extension. Debtor did acknowledge requesting the convenience checks she used to secure certain of the cash advances. … Nevertheless, AT & T’s case must fail because it did not establish reliance.

McLean v. City of Philadelphia, Dept. of Revenue (In Re McLean)

97 B.R. 789 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 1989

Such a conclusion was clearly correct prior to the 1963 amendments to § 7106 of the Municipal Liens Act, see, e.g., Township of Lower Merion v. … The City’s final defense is raised in its posttrial memorandum of law, 17 that it qualifies as a good faith transferee pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550 (d) and, therefore, is entitled to a lien on the subject real property for

In Re Stoney Creek Technologies, LLC

364 B.R. 882 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 19, 2007

Even taking into account costs which have not been quantified, there is clearly an equity cushion. Why would that not be sufficient to adequately protect M & B? … It is the Debtor's burden to establish that the existing secured creditor is adequately protected.

Liebersohn v. Vetri (In Re D'Ambrosio)

452 B.R. 562 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 18, 2011

When a party answering a request for admission has a contrary or more expansive view of the facts which he considers relevant thereto, he “may qualify his answer based on his understanding of the facts.” … It was unsatisfactory in that it failed to clearly list the undisputed and disputed issues of fact, damages or relief being sought, causes of action being pursued and legal issues at stake.

In Re Cudeyro

213 B.R. 910 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 20, 1997

After a hearing, this motion was granted and a bar date of January 31, 1997 was established. (Docket entry # 63.) … Only if such amendment is allowed is Debtor entitled to an opportunity to establish his homestead claim”).

Lacheen v. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Lacheen)

365 B.R. 475 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 20, 2007

It was clearly established that both Mr. and Mrs. … Every year she signed a tax return which would clearly indicate that estimated payments were not made.

In Re Total Containment, Inc.

335 B.R. 589 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 18, 2005

See id. at 633 (“[T]hose who do not qualify as per se insiders because they are not within the categories specifically listed in the definitional statute can qualify as insiders only if they meet the test for non-statutory … The need for closer scrutiny does not, by itself, establish a fiduciary relationship under non-bankruptcy law. 11 .

Casey v. Kasal (In Re Kasal)

217 B.R. 727 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 20, 1998

. & C.2d 400, 403 (Pa.Com.Pl.1975) (“it is well-established that items of furniture are in no circumstances to be deemed fixtures” which would be included in a sale of realty). … We believe that this figure is the amount which should have been disclosed as the value of the Goods by the Debtor, or at least as an alternative qualified by any opinion that the value was lower.

Larry Christopher Sprecher

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 19, 2025

Kirklin’s claim only qualifies as a non-priority equitable distribution claim. … Kirklin clearly received less compensation from her employment and business in 2018 than did Debtor. That said, although Ms.

In Re Brandywine River Hotel, Inc.

177 B.R. 10 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 19, 1995

Wilderman, 101 Pa.Super. 168 (1931), originally cited as supportive of Suburban Federal’s position, is clearly inappo-site. … The corporate veil is pierced only when “the corporation was an artifice and a sham to execute illegitimate purposes and [an] abuse of the corporate fiction and immunity that it carries.” Wheeling-Pittsburgh v.

Kirklin v. Sprecher

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 19, 2025

Kirklin’s claim only qualifies as a non-priority equitable distribution claim. … Kirklin clearly received less compensation from her employment and business in 2018 than did Debtor. That said, although Ms.

718 Arch Street Associates, Ltd. v. Blatstein (In Re Main, Inc.)

213 B.R. 67 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 8, 1997

Miller’s testimony establishes that no siphoning of funds to Blatstein occurred. … This conduct is clearly inequitable conduct which greatly unfairly disadvantaged Main’s creditors.

Dechert Price & Rhoads v. Direct Satellite Communications, Inc. (In Re Direct Satellite Communications, Inc.)

96 B.R. 507 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 1989

Therefore, clearly, under the principles established in, e.g., Lentino and Storm , expert testimony on the part of the Debtor was required to sustain a cause of action as to all three requisite elements as to each of the … Clearly, there is no expert testimony on this record establishing the link that Dechert’s malpractice was the proximate cause of the Debtor’s loss of Marquee.

In Re Leedy Mortg. Co., Inc.

126 B.R. 907 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 29, 1991

While the winding down process did not unravel in his hands, the Trustee clearly performed no miracles, large or small, in the process. … E.g., In re Rauch, 110 B.R. 467, 477 (Bankr.E.D.Cal.1990) ($65 per hour awarded to expert, highly qualified trustee).

In re Marinari

596 B.R. 809 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 15, 2019

§ 706(a) is subject to § 706(d), which only permits conversion if the debtor qualifies as a debtor under the chapter to which conversion is sought. 549 U.S. at 370 -74 , 127 S.Ct. 1105 . … That she disagreed with those cases, and with Murphy's interpretation of Marrama , 17 does not establish that she committed clear legal error in rejecting them.

Krasny v. Gi Nam (In Re Gi Yeong Nam)

245 B.R. 216 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 11, 2000

Thus, there is a causal connection between the two events, suggesting that the subsequent litigation may lack the requisite independence to qualify as a “separate proceeding.” Co mpare United States v. … Indeed when a debtor has not been granted immunity from prosecution, Code §§ 344 and 727(a)(6) allow him to invoke his fifth amendment privilege and still receive his discharge.

Price v. DeVos (In re Price)

573 B.R. 579 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 23, 2017

The Debtor’s degree qualified her to take the licensing board examinations for both vascular and general sonogra-phy. (A.T. at 9:45-9:46,10:22). 13. … Apparently, the market is overflowing with far too many qualified vascular sonographers. 49 (A.T. at 10:21-10:22).