Case law

Spear v. CEMA Distribution (In Re Rainbow Music, Inc.)

154 B.R. 559 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California · May 11, 1993

This Court can envision no policy reason for making such transfers immune from recovery. … of events in order to establish its defense.

Blocksom v. Brown (In re Brown)

555 B.R. 854 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia · Aug 4, 2016

To qualify for employment as an asset recovery specialist, Blocksom must be disinterested. See 11 U.S.C. § 327 (a). … This nine-and-a-half-month delay between the time in which he performed his services and the submission of the Application to Employ clearly demonstrates Blocksom’s neglect.

In Re Fulton

211 B.R. 247 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Jul 7, 1997

This Court declines the invitation by these debtors to place an interpretation on §§ 506 and 553, that clearly was not intended by the Congress. … Fulton clearly refers to his retirement account as ERISA-qualified.

In re Sutton-Robinson

472 B.R. 77 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Arizona · Mar 19, 2012

These are clearly the same exact shares and amounts, transferred between the two accounts. … Whether Debtor must obtain such a determination is not clearly *86 required under Richey .

In Re DiPietro

135 B.R. 773 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 28, 1992

These cases establish that the issue of whether the creditor actually needed the joinder of the spouse of a principal borrower in a loan transaction is analyzed under applicable state law. … However, the loans in issue clearly involve “extension of credit primarily for business, ... purposes, ...” to which the TILA does not apply. 15 U.S.C. § 1605 (a).

Waldschmidt v. Ford Motor Credit Co. (In Re Murray)

27 B.R. 445 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Tennessee · Feb 8, 1983

The idea was that the preference statute should establish a uniform grace period.” 14 B.R. at 798-799 (emphasis added). … If a creditor can qualify under any one of the exceptions, then he is protected to that extent. If he can qualify under several, he is protected by each to the extent he can qualify under each. H.R.Rep.

Olick v. Kearney (In Re Olick)

398 B.R. 532 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 2, 2008

Step 1 To establish a prima facie age discrimination/termination case, a plaintiff must prove: “(1) that he was at least forty years old, (2) that he was fired, (3) that he was qualified for the job from which he was fired … Specifically, they contend that summary judgment record establishes that the Debtor: (1) was not qualified for the field agent position; and (2) was not replaced by someone sufficiently younger to create an inference of age

In Re Rodriguez

336 B.R. 462 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Idaho · Dec 9, 2005

He spoke to a person on the phone who said they could download our information but that there was no qualified credit counselor available, and that he was not qualified. … The circumstances were not clearly exigent, and they do not satisfy the Court.

In Re Bear Stearns High-Grade Structured Credit Strategies Master Fund, Ltd.

374 B.R. 122 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 5, 2007

Clearly, even if I were to strain to find sufficient factors to satisfy the “nonmain” eligibility status pursuant to section 1502(5), the effort does not yield a finding of a seat for local business activity (proxy for establishment … Court granted recognition without distinguishing between main and nonmain proceeding because the foreign proceeding clearly qualified as one or the other and the relief sought-recognition of the injunction contained in the

Rebekah v. Crownover (In Re Crownover)

417 B.R. 45 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · Aug 27, 2009

For the purposes of summary judgment, the sentence in question is too vague to qualify as a finding that the debt- or intentionally breached the contract. … But, the state court’s judgment does not clearly decide this issue. Thus, an essential element of the § 523(a)(6) exception was not clearly decided by the state court’s judgment.

In Re Richardson Service Corp.

210 B.R. 332 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Missouri · May 16, 1997

The legislative history of the January amendment clearly establishes congressional intent that the fee amendment apply to all pending Chapter 11 cases. … The court clerk’s ministerial notation of “closed” in the files is for statistical reporting purposes only and does not establish legal closure of the cases.

In Re West

64 B.R. 738 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · Sep 3, 1986

In this case, it is sufficient that the Debtor did not exercise dominion over the trust funds in a manner inconsistent with the purpose of the spendthrift trust and the Debtor, the settlor, and the trustee *744 are clearly … Two tests have been established by the courts to determine whether a specific plan falls within the ORS 23.170 exemption. First, the person .granting the trust must be different from the person granted the trust.

Derek & Matthew Bissett Farms v. Bissett Produce, Inc. (In re Bissett Produce, Inc.)

512 B.R. 528 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · May 21, 2014

Defendants contend that this conceded fact is fatal to plaintiffs’ PACA claims, reasoning that both the applicable statutes and a comprehensive body of case law establish quite clearly that a “supplier” seeking to claim entitlement … It is inconceivable that if this was to be a requirement for the protected class, it would not have been clearly stated in the statute, legislative history, or regulations. Id. at 6 .

California Steel Co. v. Dodds (In Re California Steel Co.)

21 B.R. 383 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 8, 1982

Professional engineering services is one of the services which qualifies for a mechanic’s lien under the Act. … In the case at bar, the first two requirements are clearly satisfied.

Springfield Hospital, Inc. v. Carranza, in her capacity as Administrator for the

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Vermont · May 4, 2020

If the Defendant is not protected by sovereign immunity, then the Court must next determine whether the Plaintiff has met its burden of establishing that a TRO is warranted based on any of the Plaintiff’s alleged bases … Since the Court rejected this sovereign immunity argument in its analysis of the likelihood of the merits, supra, it does not address it again here. 7 The Court makes no findings as to whether the Plaintiff qualifies for

United States v. Collier

8 B.R. 909 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 6, 1981

These defenses give rise to several complicated issues clearly to delineate exactly what the defendant wishes to prove to the Court. … The right to a discharge is purely statutory, and the Congress may at any time amend, qualify, or remove this statutory right.

Erbschloe v. U.S. Department of Education (In re Erbschloe)

502 B.R. 470 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Virginia · Jun 13, 2013

The second prong of the Brunner Test is the heart of the test because it “most clearly reflects the congressional imperative that the debtor’s hardship must be more than the normal hardship that accompanies any bankruptcy … Furthermore, the Court has found that the Debtor qualifies for the Income Based Repayment Plan.

In re World Marketing Chicago, LLC

564 B.R. 587 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 24, 2017

The WARN Class, as the applicant, bears the burden of establishing its entitlement. Woods v. City Nat. Bank & Tr. … (supporting its holding with evidence that showed United Healthcare was clearly liquidating).

In Re Gift

469 B.R. 800 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Tennessee · Mar 22, 2012

Both the policy and the result clearly seem unwise. … Jan. 5, 2009) (finding that penalties may not qualify as "fees” or "costs,” but qualify as "charges.”). In this unpublished decision, the bankruptcy court found a statutory tax penalty was a "charge” under section 506.

Comcast of Los Angeles, Inc. v. Sandoval (In re Sandoval)

341 B.R. 282 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · Mar 31, 2006

The field report indicates that both converters were “clearly receiving all premium and pay per view channels. They were receiving (SHO-27) Real Men, (iN1-75) Just Married.” … Even if Comcast had proven such damages, it has failed to show that such damages qualify for exception to discharge under § 523(a)(2)(A), (4), or (6).