Case law

Hanes v. Vital Products Co. (In Re Vital Products Co.)

210 B.R. 109 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · May 13, 1997

. § 1-201(37), as codified in Ohio, a transaction qualifies as a security interest and falls within the scope of article 9 where the obligation to pay a stream of rent payments extends for the entire term of the lease and … nominal consideration. 6 The above-quoted language from the Lease clearly shows that the Debtor was provided an opportunity to become owner of the equipment at the end of the lease period by simply making a single payment

In Re Harrison

216 B.R. 451 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Oct 9, 1997

Clearly, Dr. Martel and the Debtor have complete autonomy to make all business related decisions. … This clearly shows that the amount of the Debtor’s compensation was not fixed, but was subject to Dr. Martel and the Debtor’s discretion.

Cooley v. Wachovia Mortgage Co. (In Re Cooley)

365 B.R. 464 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 2007

SABIC moved to dismiss the federal action on the ground of sovereign immunity, but the district court denied its motion. Id. SABIC appealed to the Third Circuit. Id. … Bank One National Association (In re Randall), supra, 358 B.R. at 160-161 ("Clearly, a determination by me that the 2000 loan transaction was validly rescinded in April of 2003 would have the effect of reversing the state

In Re Chicoine

97 B.R. 30 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Montana · Sep 21, 1988

Debtor and Baileys agree that the test to establish an informal Proof of Claim is that a document qualifies as an informal Proof of Claim if it states an explicit demand showing the nature and amount of the claims against … I conclude, as did the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in Pizza of Hawaii, supra, and Sambo’s, supra, that such actions by Baileys clearly evidence their intent to hold the estate liable.

Halverson v. Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (In Re Halverson)

189 B.R. 840 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama · Sep 26, 1995

Halverson has not established a balance in that account. Health insurance is provided through Ms. Halverson’s employer. Mr. … In 1980 the Southern Division of this Court considered factors expressed by the Commission on the Bankruptcy Laws of the United States, an organization established in 1970.

Huff v. Brooks (In Re Brooks)

175 B.R. 409 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Alabama · Dec 14, 1994

On its face, the statement shows that Oscar Huff financially qualifies for in forma pauperis (“IFP”) status. II. LAW A. … . § 523 is clearly a core matter. 28 U.S.C. § 157 (b)(2)(I). Entry of orders ancillary to a dischargeability judgment is appropriate.

In Re Ezaki

140 B.R. 747 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · May 26, 1992

As such restitution, the Act entitles all “eligible individuals” to payment of $20,000 from a fund established by the Act. 50 U.S.C.A. app. §§ 1989b-3, 1989b-4 (1990). … Third, the debtor clearly has not exhausted his administrative remedies as required by 28 U.S.C. § 2675 (a) since he claims an entitlement under the Civil Liberties Act of 1988.

In Re Medical Care Management Co.

361 B.R. 863 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Tennessee · Jan 2, 2003

In summary, Duryee considered a generic jurisdictional grant with no clear purpose other than to establish a convenient forum, while Munich, Davister, U.S. Fin. … Clearly, in this case, Tennessee’s comprehensive Insurers Rehabilitation and Liquidation Act, T.C.A. § 56-9-101, et seq., and those portions of the Act implicated here, are designed to “regulate the business of insurance”

Wallach ex rel. Bankruptcy for Northstar Development Corp. v. Buchheit (In re Northstar Development Corp.)

465 B.R. 6 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. New York · Feb 10, 2012

The trustee contends that as an insider, Buchheit cannot qualify as a good-faith recipient of payment. … Rather, to establish a fraudulent conveyance, a trustee must present some other evidence of intent.

In Re: Named Involuntary Steven Wayne Bonilla

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California · Aug 22, 2019

[nJo lawful jurisdiction of subject matter nor of person was, nor has been established on the record”).) … to abolish this long-established 22 principle.

Lee v. McCardle (In re Peeples)

553 B.R. 892 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Utah · Jul 14, 2016

“It is clearly established that the automatic stay does not apply to non-bankrupt co-defendants of a debtor even if they are in a similar legal or factual nexus with the debtor.” 14 This principle has been followed even when … They don’t need it, and at the same time it would work a hardship on plaintiffs, by giving an unwarranted immunity from suit to solvent co-defendants.

In Re Cole Bros., Inc.

137 B.R. 647 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · Jan 28, 1992

An agreement which, standing alone, requires John Deere to provide retail financing to qualified customers of the Debtor would be barred from assumption under § 365(c)(2) of the Code. … But, the Debtor may assume an executory contract establishing an ongoing dealership agreement where financing clearly accompanies the relationship, but is incidental to it.

Deak & Co. v. Soedjono (In Re Deak & Co.)

63 B.R. 422 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jul 24, 1986

However, his appearance is being considered as part of the contact penumbra which DAMA established with this forum. … Specifically, Deak sought to have the liens, if their validity was established, to attach to the proceeds of the sale.

In Re Bigalk

75 B.R. 561 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · Jun 29, 1987

On none of them did Betty make any statement denying or qualifying the implied assertion that she held a full ownership interest in all of the property scheduled. … First, Betty does not qualify as a “codebtor” within the meaning of § 1201.

In Re Marshall

54 B.R. 309 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · Oct 2, 1985

Although appellant contends that there is no explicit ‘ongoing business’ requirement to Chapter 11 reorganization, such a requirement is in *311 herent in the statute and clearly implied in 11 U.S.C. § 1112 (b).” … A purpose of a federal bankruptcy court is to “establish * * uniform laws on the subject of Bankruptcies throughout the United States.” U.S. Const. Art. I § 8 cl. 4.

In Re Holt

422 B.R. 778 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 14, 2010

Accord In re Conner, 172 B.R. 119, 121 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.l994)(stating that “[i]f all that is required to establish an annuity contract is a stream of payments over time, all installment contracts would qualify as an annuity … and that is clearly not what the McCollam decision requires”).

In Re Norris

225 B.R. 329 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Jul 13, 1998

Debtors did, however, qualify for a mortgage based on debtors’ then-current income, without accounting for any future increases. … The debtor’s trustee was qualified as an expert to testify on matters concerning the reasonableness of bankruptcy schedules. 4 .

In Re American Preferred Prescription, Inc.

218 B.R. 680 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · Mar 9, 1998

The Debtor has drained the entire escrow fund established pursuant to the Plan to pay the compensatory damages in full. … The Court is aware that the burden of establishing entitlement to reimbursement for expenses falls on the applicant.

T.M. Sweeney & Sons, LTL Services, Inc. v. Crawford (In Re T.M. Sweeney & Sons, LTL Services, Inc.)

120 B.R. 101 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 21, 1990

The credibility of asset valuations set forth on the balance sheet was established by the testimony of Sweeney during the trial. Sweeney was duly qualified to attest to the information given on the balance sheet. … The statute clearly does not require an actual delivery of the discovered assets until the turnover order is entered.

Chase Manhattan Bank USA, N.A. v. Poor (In Re Poor)

219 B.R. 332 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maine · Apr 3, 1998

However, as it is the only qualifying cash advance debt owed Chase by Poor it falls below § 523(a)(2)(C)’s $1,000.00 threshold. … Bixel (In re Bixel), 215 B.R. 772 , 778 & n. 3 (Bankr.S.D.Cal.1997) (reflecting that using a credit card account to pay off other credit card accounts was more clearly described as involving balance transfers rather than