Case law

Flores v. Illinois Department of Public Health (In Re Flores)

300 B.R. 599 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Vermont · Nov 5, 2003

There is little disagreement that § 106(a) of the Bankruptcy Code clearly articulates Congress’ intention to abrogate state sovereign immunity. … Conclusion The Court finds Congress clearly articulated its intent to abrogate states’ sovereign immunity in 11 U.S.C. 106(a). Further, relying on the thorough, sound and compelling rationale of Hood v.

Ortiz v. Aurora Health Care, Inc. (In Re Ortiz)

464 B.R. 807 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Feb 3, 2012

Stat. § 146.82 clearly applies in judicial proceedings. … statute clearly indicates the legislature intended to modify absolute common law witness immunity in order to provide a remedy of damages against persons who violate the act.”

In Re Conti

42 B.R. 122 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Jul 23, 1984

The IRS argues that sovereign immunity also bars any award of attorney’s fees. However, the statutory authorization for the award of attorney’s fees is an express waiver, although limited, of sovereign immunity. … Thus, the government clearly violated rights that Congress had given to the debtor.

Saunders v. Reeher (In Re Saunders)

105 B.R. 781 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 27, 1989

Clearly, one question is whether the debtor suffered any damage due to defendants’ delay in awarding her a higher education grant pending the receipt of a bankruptcy discharge. … According to the policy of PHEAA, the debtor's discharge of her prior student loan obligation now and hereafter renders her eligible for higher education grants for which she otherwise qualifies.

RMS Titanic, Inc. v. French Republic (In re RMS Titanic, Inc.)

569 B.R. 825 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 25, 2017

In fact, it is a well-established principle of statutory construction that Congress may abrogate a sovereign’s immunity by enacting a statute that clearly establishes the abrogation. State of Florida v. … Within its text, the document does not expressly award unconditional title of the Artifacts to the Debtor’s predecessor, and the record does not clearly evidence the legal effect of the document or the nature of the interest

Rotondo Weirich Enters., Inc. v. Sundt/Layton (In re Rotondo Weirich Enters., Inc.)

583 B.R. 860 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 16, 2018

Thus, the Complaint's allegations do not definitively establish the existence of a joint venture. … Pa. 1985) : Implicit in the bankruptcy concept of turnover is the idea that the property being sought is clearly the property of the Debtor but not in the Debtor's possession.

In Re Hasse

246 B.R. 247 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Mar 2, 2000

. § 34-34 in 1999 5 by adding subsection H: A retirement plan established pursuant to §§ 408 and 408 A of the Internal Revenue Code is exempt to the same extent as that permitted under federal law for a qualified plan established … Because the debtor’s bankruptcy petition was filed after the effective date (July 1, 1999) of Va.Code Ann. § 34-34(H), the amendment clearly applies to the facts at hand. 6 .

Pontes v. Lapatin (In Re Pontes)

280 B.R. 20 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Rhode Island · Jun 24, 2002

In summary on the Rule 19 issue: (1) the State of Rhode Island has failed, for procedural and substantive reasons, to qualify for intervention; (2) the State has failed to establish that it is an indispensable party; and … Clearly the right of redemption is a property interest. b.

Subranni v. Navajo Times Publishing Co. (In re Group Communications, Inc.)

568 B.R. 616 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 29, 2016

Another factor that distinguishes an organization entitled to tribal sovereign immunity (as opposed to a mere business interest of a tribe) is that the tribal council establishes the organization pursuant to its powers of … Auth., 144 F.3d 581, 583 (8th Cir. 1998) (concluding that a housing authority “established by a tribal council pursuant to its powers of self-government” is a tribal agency entitled to tribal sovereign immunity).

Matter of Wild Oaks Utilities, Inc.

18 B.R. 959 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 30, 1982

The Town of Lew-isboro further notes that in determining the validity of Utilities’ claim for damages the court will have to decide questions relating to the qualified immunity of local officials acting in a quasi-judicial … They have raised issues as to the qualified immunity of local officials acting in a quasi-judicial function as well as the reasonableness of the sewage rates based upon a method and procedure established by an earlier state

O'Brien v. State, Agency of Natural Resources (In Re O'Brien)

216 B.R. 731 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Vermont · Feb 2, 1998

The abrogation of sovereign immunity prescribed by § 106(a) is expressly limited and qualified: “Notwithstanding an assertion of sovereign immunity, sovereign immunity is abrogated as to a governmental unit to the extent … by state governments in violation of the automatic stay, the turnover provisions, or any of the other mechanisms established by Congress to protect the property of the estate.”

Grant, Konvalinka & Harrison, P.C. v. Banks (In re McKenzie)

472 B.R. 455 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · Mar 30, 2012

In addressing whether the trustee was only protected by qualified immunity pursuant to an exception to the immunity doctrine in the Second Circuit, the bankruptcy court explained the policy behind trustee immunity. … Brown: [w]e explained the policy rationale of the qualified immunity doctrine, i.e., the “desire to shield public officials from diverting their energies through the forced defense of challenges to their actions taken in

In Re Harrison

236 B.R. 784 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 12, 1999

In sum, this record lacks sufficient clarity to permit a conclusion that, pursuant to Orange Brevard Plumbing and Beebe , the sale proceeds yet to be received — if any— will or will not retain their homestead immunity. … on debtors’ daughter’s testimony that she was searching for a new home for the debtors to purchase, thus precluding summary judgment for creditor in debtors’ declaratory action brought to determine if the sale proceeds qualified

In Re Brown

244 B.R. 62 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 3, 2000

That district court rulings are entitled to substantial deference by bankruptcy courts is well established. See, e.g., In re Jason Realty, L.P., 59 F.3d 423 , 429 n. 2 (3d Cir.1995). … Sovereign Immunity.

Taylor v. Georgia (In Re Taylor)

249 B.R. 571 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · Jun 8, 2000

For these reasons, the Court is convinced that the Debtors’ complaint qualifies as a suit such that the Georgia Department of Revenue is entitled to assert its sovereign immunity. See Univ. of Virginia v. … To establish ... uniform Laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States”).

West Virginia, Department of Finance & Administration v. Hassett (In Re O.P.M. Leasing Services, Inc.)

21 B.R. 993 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jul 14, 1982

He qualified this opinion only by asserting: “My opinion is qualified to the extent that the remedies available to enforce your rights under the Transactional Documents may be limited by bankruptcy, insolvency and other laws … . *1001 One well-established exception to the general sovereign immunity of states conferred by the Eleventh Amendment is where Congress has conditioned a state’s participation in a federally regulated activity upon an abrogation

Ehlers v. Howell (In Re Ehlers)

189 B.R. 835 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama · Aug 21, 1995

Crow, 49 F.3d 679 (11th Cir.1995), the per curiam opinion reads: We turn next to the question of whether the defendants were entitled to summary judgment on their qualified immunity defense. … This means, in the context of a motion based on qualified immunity, that the plaintiff must show “there is a genuine issue of material fact regarding the defendant’s conduct as being viola-tive of the clearly established

Rose v. U.S. Dept. of Education (In Re Rose)

215 B.R. 755 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Missouri · Dec 19, 1997

None of the other defendants have responded and therefore, the Court concludes that they have not established they are entitled to. Eleventh Amendment protection. … The scope of these available defenses and the state’s concomitant waiver of immunity is a question of federal law and procedure, but well-established principles of sovereign immunity dictate that this waiver be narrowly construed

In Re Harris

188 B.R. 444 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Sep 27, 1995

Under the established federal legal system, the decisions of one Circuit are not binding on other Circuits. … The Supreme Court did not specify what elements must be established to determine whether or not a Plan is an ERISA-qualified Plan.

In Re DiPiazza

29 B.R. 916 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · May 13, 1983

The defendants cite In re Turpin, 644 F.2d 472 (5th Cir.1981) and In re Parker, 473 F.Supp. 746 (W.D.N.Y.1979) for the proposition that qualified ERISA pension plans are immune from the reach of a Chapter 7 trustee. … This court finds that the pension plan herein does not satisfy the definition of a spendthrift trust, as established in Illinois.