Case law

Lombardi v. Picard

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 10, 2022

time of the attack, he lacked the requisite intent required under § 523(a)(6) and, therefore, the Civil Judgment does not qualify as a debt for willful and malicious injury. II. … § 2702(a)(1), and thus the Guilty Plea alone, which did not indicate whether the plea was based upon reckless or intentional conduct, could not as a matter of law establish that the Civil Judgment based on the same conduct

In Re Abruzzo

249 B.R. 78 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 25, 2000

The First Merchants decision produced a result that the Third Circuit acknowledged “leads inescapably to tension with the statutory scheme for retention of professionals by the [creditors’] committee established by § 1103 … I found both experts to be qualified for the tasks they performed and find no reason to discount Levin’s testimony for his lack of specialization nor Ludwig’s for his relatively fewer credentials.

In re Frazer/Exton Development, L.P.

503 B.R. 620 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 26, 2013

Sovereign’s tarnished reputation and lack of credibility in responding to discovery should clearly be a topic of grave concern to the bank. … Consequently, it is difficult to conclude that Sovereign’s discovery conduct would qualify as “misconduct” for purposes of Rule 60(b)(3). 2.

Wiley v. Olson

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 10, 2024

The $84,000 difference is clearly attributable to the Outstanding CMG Payments on McGrath’s books. Notwithstanding Mr. … While that profit clearly does not consist of out-of-pocket payments McGrath made, it is a debt of the Debtor that arises from the money the Debtor obtained from McGrath by fraud. Mr.

Stephen J. Scherf, SBA Plan Trust Administrator of v. Financial Resources Federal Credit Union

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 21, 2024

dispute as to whether the Transfers qualify for the ordinary course of business exception under § 547(c)(2). … Feb. 5, 2021) (application for a Payment Protection Program Loan to provide emergency assistance for the 2020 coronavirus pandemic was “clearly not in the ordinary course of business” because the program “exists because

Krasny v. Bagga

357 B.R. 324 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 20, 2006

Where a matter does not qualify as “core” but has some meaningful nexus with the bankruptcy case, it may nevertheless be heard by the Bankruptcy Court on a preliminary basis: A bankruptcy judge may hear a proceeding that … In response, Plaintiff offers the rather circular argument that all they need to show to establish a viable turnover claim is that the money demanded is property of the estate. Plaintiffs’ Brief, 7.

Finkel v. Polichuk (In re Polichuk)

506 B.R. 405 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 27, 2014

Well-Established General Principles B. The Movant’s Burden to Establish that a Non-Movant Who Has the Burden of Proof Lacks Evidence to Support an Essential Element of the Claim VI.THE NON-DEBTOR DEFENDANTS’ MOTION A. … Ass’n, 679 F.2d 316, 321 (3d Cir.1982) (“a creditor of the debtor alone may not levy upon the debtor’s individual undivided interest since his interest is immune from process”); see also In re Brannon, 476 F.3d 170, 173 (

Allentown Ambassadors, Inc. v. Northeast American Baseball, LLC (In Re Allentown Ambassadors, Inc.)

361 B.R. 422 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 5, 2007

Id. 43 An assignee may be admitted as a member of the LLC, but that right is qualified. … liable to the Company for monetary damages for an act or omission in such Member’s capacity as a Manager, except as provided in the Act for (I) acts or omissions which a Member knew at the time of the acts or omissions were clearly

In Re Abruzzo

245 B.R. 201 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 9, 1999

Clearly if property does not exist, the debtor can have no rights as to which a security interest can attach. … Indeed, the Debtor does not make a claim to owning a portable heater, humidifier, dehumidifier or a qualifying lighting fixture.

Padilla v. GMAC Mortgage Corp. (In Re Padilla)

389 B.R. 409 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 2008

This result is clearly at odds with the notion of providing a successful debtor afresh start. … (endorsing the same principle, but adding the qualifying words, "in general”). 65 . See, e.g., Geruschat v.

Holber v. Suffolk Construction Co. (In re Red Rock Services Co.)

480 B.R. 576 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 30, 2012

Based on these facts, I conclude that Trustee clearly established that Suffolk owed Red Rock a contractual obligation to honor Change Order No. 00003, at least after it successfully pursued the claim against Silo Point. … Clearly, Trustee proved no link between the $11,710.79 that Suffolk received from Hartford Insurance Company to reimburse it for paying its own staff and Change Order No. 00003.

In re Johnson

601 B.R. 365 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 14, 2019

Therefore, the Debtor's credible testimony has established that that Mr. … June 16, 2016) ("Attorneys' fees...may qualify as actual damages under § 362(k) when they are necessary to stop an ongoing stay violation, undo the effects of a stay violation, or recover pre-litigation actual damages.").

In Re Hyman Companies, Inc.

440 B.R. 390 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 28, 2010

But the evidence established that Marriott Copley requested no such effort. … This after-the-fact review clearly does not satisfy the obligation to use best efforts that is prescribed by Section 11 of the Lease.

In Re Jamuna Real Estate, LLC

357 B.R. 324 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 20, 2006

Where a matter does not qualify as "core" but has some meaningful nexus with the bankruptcy case, it may nevertheless be heard by the Bankruptcy Court on a preliminary basis: A bankruptcy judge may hear a proceeding that … In response, Plaintiff offers the rather circular argument that all they need to show to establish a viable turnover claim is that the money demanded is property of the estate. Plaintiffs' Brief, 7.

Steinbrecher v. Mid-Penn Consumer Discount Co. (In Re Steinbrecher)

116 A.L.R. Fed. 881 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 5, 1990

The Third Circuit Court of Appeals has, on a number of occasions, established the framework for interpreting TILA. *161 The Truth-in-Lending Act was passed primarily to aid the unsophisticated consumer so that he would not … Even though this later premium was added to the loan amount, the Official Staff Commentary to Regulation Z clearly states, at § 226.17(e)l: 1. Events causing inaccuracies.

City of Chester v. PHCC LLC d/b/a Preston Hollow Community Capital, e

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 3, 2023

In Count I (Declaratory Judgment), the City asks this Court to enter an order declaring that the Pledged Revenues payable to the City after the Petition Date do not qualify as “special revenues” under the Bankruptcy Code … Under Pennsylvania law, “[l]anguage not clearly written as a condition precedent is presumed not to be, unless the contrary clearly appears to be the intention of the parties.” Mellon Bank, N.A. v. Aetna Bus.

In Re Townsville

268 B.R. 95 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 3, 2001

Some courts have concluded that the statute is unambiguous and clearly identifies the date of the foreclosure sale as the cut-off for curing a default under a mortgage., See e.g., McCarn v. … See also In re Bobo, supra, 246 B.R. at 458 (holding that state law must be used “to determine whether there have been steps that qualify as a ‘foreclosure sale’ within the meaning of § 1322(c)(1) and to determine whether

Hundt v. Ventrone

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 31, 2023

Accordingly, a debt could still be “in the nature of support” even though it would not legally qualify as alimony or support under state law. Id. … Thus, while the PSA initially labels the Marital Obligation as an equitable distribution, it clearly states the parties’ intention that any repayment of the Marital Obligation to the Trust is to be used for the Plaintiff

Ventrone v. Hundt

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 31, 2023

Accordingly, a debt could still be “in the nature of support” even though it would not legally qualify as alimony or support under state law. Id. … Thus, while the PSA initially labels the Marital Obligation as an equitable distribution, it clearly states the parties’ intention that any repayment of the Marital Obligation to the Trust is to be used for the Plaintiff

Maria Louisa Sage

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 15, 2022

In other words, qualifying restitution and fines under §523(a)(7) may be “protected from discharge.” Id. at 43. … Sept. 28, 2020) (“The term ‘actual pecuniary loss’ clearly connotes measurable damages from particular instances of wrongdoing.”) (citation omitted).