Case law

Omar Weaver Rosales - Adversary Proceeding

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · Jul 9, 2020

connection with representing a client in litigation.”55 Conversely, attorneys are not protected from liability to non-clients for their actions when they do not qualify as “the kind of conduct in which an attorney engages … to establish that the attorney immunity doctrine is applicable in this 54 Barcelo v.

Walker v. Midland Mortgage Co. (In Re Medlin)

201 B.R. 188 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · Oct 8, 1996

The evidence before the court clearly establishes that the Defendant had knowledge of the Debtors’ bankruptcy case on July 12, 1996. First, and foremost, the court takes judicial notice pursuant to Fed. … These facts clearly establish that both the Defendant and its attorney possessed knowledge of the Debtors’ bankruptcy case at the time that the stay was violated. 5 *195 In conclusion, the court finds that the Defendant willfully

In Re Gronski

65 B.R. 932 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 16, 1986

The Government asserts that, since the Debtor has not undertaken to establish that he meets the criteria of 42 U.S.C. § 294f(g), his debt to the HHS is non:dis-chargeable. … Clearly, Congress, as opposed to some state legislature or other body, has the exclusive power to establish exceptions to the broad discharge otherwise obtainable under 11 U.S.C. § 1328 (a), as it was the creator of this

Williams v. Law Society of Hong Kong

264 B.R. 234 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · Jun 28, 2001

This again demonstrated that [Williams] had clearly no intention to pursue his appeals according to the law but had tried to threaten the Board.” (Id.) … Although the position was created and empowered by Hong Kong ordinance, the Commissioner does not have governmental immunity from the jurisdiction of the court: See Ord.

In Re May

261 B.R. 770 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Apr 2, 2001

His claim of exemption as set forth in Schedule C listed the following items, which the Debtor seeks to immunize from administration: A. … The most recent amendment just before trial is clearly indicative that it was done for the purpose of increasing the deficit to establish and to show that the Debtor has no surplus from which he can fund a meaningful Chapter

In Re Astle

364 B.R. 735 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Idaho · Mar 22, 2007

And just as EnRe LP held that a “general agreement for fees ... does not qualify, if it is not the agreement under which the ‘allowed secured claim’ arose,” a general statute providing for fees would not qualify under amended … Since Idaho Power failed to establish that it is entitled to attorneys’ fees under § 506(b), the Application, Doc. No. 128, will be denied. An order will be entered accordingly. 1 .

In Re Cupboards, Inc.

190 B.R. 969 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 3, 1996

Although, he later qualified this statement by stating that Goff is not an employee, he just pays Goff when he performs work for him *971 such as driving to Tampa to file documents in the Bankruptcy Court. … Basically, these are the relevant facts established at the evidentiary hearing. Upon these facts, the U.S. Trustee contends it is entitled to the relief sought by the Motion.

In Re Villa Diablo Associates

156 B.R. 650 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California · Jul 2, 1993

. § 6621 should be used, it acknowledged that the § 6621 rate was “clearly relevant” as long as it tracked market rates. … This begins with the establishment of a “base rate” utilizing the rate on treasury obligations, the prime rate, or some other established index.

In Re Caribbean Petroleum Corp.

443 B.R. 560 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico · Dec 23, 2010

Such matters, CHARTIS states, are clearly better suited for determination by the Commonwealth Courts. … The Third Circuit has established a much-cited standard for determining whether a proceeding is “related.” In Pacor, Inc. v.

Washburn v. United States (In Re Washburn)

290 B.R. 162 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jul 16, 2002

Clearly, under Hindenlang, that was not a return. … In Hat-ton, the court held that neither the SFR nor the installment agreement qualified as a “return” for the purpose of discharge-ability.

In Re Renegade Holdings, Inc.

429 B.R. 502 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. North Carolina · Apr 16, 2010

their escrow accounts is established under the Qualifying Statute and is based upon the NPMs’ sales in the year preceding the date in which the payment is due. … The Debtors have established an escrow account at Sun-Trust Bank as required under N.C. Gen.

In Re Monzon

214 B.R. 38 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Oct 21, 1997

In re Boyd, 121 B.R. at 625 (“The Debtor’s equity in the entireties property above the amount of the joint obligations qualifies for the § 522(b)(2)(B) exemption”); In re Geoghegan, 101 B.R. 329 , *44 331 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.l989 … Courts have cited Moore as establishing a universal bankruptcy principle: Once a trustee recovers property for the estate, the property must be equally distributed to all creditors.

Ebel v. King (In Re Ebel)

338 B.R. 862 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Apr 28, 2005

Thus, the Code imposes two important qualifiers on the Trustee’s duty to object to a proof of claim. … Ebel’s First and Second Claims for Relief, the Court finds that the Trustee is immune from suit.

Wasserman v. Household Realty Corp. (In Re Barkley)

263 B.R. 553 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 21, 2001

Further, the Trustee is correct in arguing that Household does not qualify as a good faith transferee. … Thus, even if the § 550 defenses were available to Household, it would not qualify for the defenses asserted under § 550(e). III.

In Re First Magnus Financial Corp.

390 B.R. 667 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Arizona · Jun 20, 2008

Section 503 of the Bankruptcy Code establishes what types of claims are accorded administrative status. … In § 507(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code, Congress’ intent is clear, and its precedent long-established.

Hamm v. United States

356 B.R. 263 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Nov 22, 2006

Although the Debtors did make some payments towards their tax debts, they clearly allowed massive sums to go unpaid. … Bennett’s explanation of the qualifying criteria was correct. See 26 U.S.C.

Wright v. Federal Deposit Insurance (In Re Still)

113 B.R. 311 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Apr 23, 1990

The court finds that the FDIC does not qualify as a transferee under that section and, therefore, orders the transfer avoided as requested by the Trustee. … Clearly such a purchaser would be on notice of the garnishment suit and of the bankruptcy filing because both are matters of public record.

In Re Chateaugay Corp.

153 B.R. 632 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Apr 13, 1993

Michigan has established various funds to pay workers’ compensation benefits. … A state fund is established to ensure payment to workers’ compensation beneficiaries who are not compensated by the employer.

In Re Taylor & Associates, L.P.

191 B.R. 374 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · Jan 26, 1996

The court finds that the evidence presented establishes that Taylor & Associates, L.P. is a limited partnership under the laws of the State of Tennessee; therefore, Taylor & Associates, L.P. qualifies as a debtor under the … Despite Dudley Taylor’s explanations and arguments, James Bush, the original petitiomng creditor, has presented evidence to clearly and sufficiently establish that the business of Taylor & Associates, L.P. brought certain

Springfield Medical Care Systems, Inc. v. Jovita Carranza

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Vermont · Jul 31, 2020

Further, the question of whether sovereign immunity precludes entry of an injunction against the Defendant on the Plaintiffs’ §525(a) claims is clearly a fundamental issue here, and there is no controlling Second Circuit … Although the Defendant cites the above four Supreme Court cases for the general propositions that only Congress can waive sovereign immunity and statutory waivers of sovereign immunity must be express and unequivocal (see