Case law

Matter of Carver

116 B.R. 985 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Iowa · May 29, 1990

That conclusion clearly rested on the specific facts of the case. … The debtor in the Bartlett case does not have the benefit of any specific exemption statute because her interest is in an ERISA qualified profit-sharing plan.

Digital Systems Engineering, Inc. v. Moreno (In Re Moreno)

414 B.R. 485 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Aug 17, 2009

However, granting a motion for summary judgment is clearly an adjudication of the issues in the case — there is no indication that the state court plans to revisit the decision. … To qualify for the larceny exception to discharge, this Court must find that Moreno wrongfully and with fraudulent intent took money from DSE.

In Re Flor

166 B.R. 512 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · May 3, 1994

It is firmly established that estate property in Chapter 11 does not include an individual debtor’s postpetition wages. … The plan could not be confirmed under Chapter 13, even if the debtors qualified as individuals entitled to seek relief under Chapter 13.

In Re Mootosammy

387 B.R. 291 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Mar 31, 2008

LWT, as the objecting party, has the burden of establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the debtors’ exemptions are not properly claimed. Fed. R. … Although statutory provisions certainly can affect an automatic waiver, 8 LWT has failed to show that Section 222.061 qualifies as such a statutory waiver.

Braniff International Corp. v. Interfirst Bank, Dallas, N.A. (In Re Braniff Airways, Inc.)

24 B.R. 466 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Nov 8, 1982

This is a case to establish the termination date for a qualified pension plan governed by the provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, (“ERI-SA”), 29 U.S.C. § 1001 , et seq. … pack up their belongings and go home, not to return to work the next day unless specifically requested, to look for other employment, the securing of Braniff’s facilities, the announcements made at press conferences) all clearly

Wadsworth v. Viveros (In Re Viveros)

456 B.R. 525 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Jun 7, 2011

“To establish prejudice, the party raising laches must demonstrate that the delay caused a disadvantage in asserting and establishing a claimed right or defense; the mere loss of what one would have otherwise kept does not … establish prejudice.”

In Re ICLNDS Notes Acquisition, LLC

259 B.R. 289 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 16, 2001

In other words, individuals, corporations and partnerships are clearly eligible for relief, but other similar entities are as well. … The Ohio Supreme Court, which has adopted a similar rule, explained its purpose: Litigation must be projected through the courts according to established practice by lawyers who are of high character, skilled in the profession

In re AMR Corp.

478 B.R. 599 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 13, 2012

The applicability of Rule 408 was specifically acknowledged by the Court during trial and was not corrected or qualified by the APA or any other party at that time. (See Trial Tr., 91:23-92:4, May 14, 2012(Roghair)). … It is well-established that the necessity test under Section 1113 is not a bare minimum needed for reorganization.

In Re Fries

68 B.R. 676 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 29, 1986

For these reasons, I am satisfied that the debtors have established cause for the extension of their plan to 60 months. III. … In re Hines, 723 F.2d 333 (3d Cir.1983) does not clearly address these issues.

Hutchison v. Birmingham (In Re Hutchison)

270 B.R. 429 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · Dec 7, 2001

(i) Timing of a Support Order Section 523(a)(5) clearly requires that the support obligation be established by court order. … A debt fails to qualify as such if it is determined to be nondischargeable under § 523(a).

Longhenry v. Wyatt (In Re Longhenry)

246 B.R. 234 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maryland · Feb 25, 2000

The remaining issue is whether a claim for loss of consortium that is recognized under Maryland law is of a character that qualifies as a personal injury under 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(9). … Defendants have established that their claim for loss of consortium arose from a judgment entered in a court of record as the result of the debtor’s operation of the motor vehicle while legally intoxicated.

In Re PYXSYS Corp.

288 B.R. 309 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 3, 2003

Indeed, there is a well established line of case law granting administrative expense priority for the postpetition storage of estate property. … that case, this Court ruled that postpetition rental receipts should be applied against a lessor’s *319 gross claim, but should not be applied against the cap imposed by § 502(b)(6). 9 Regarding the security deposit, it is clearly

Superior Contracting Grp. Inc. v. Rachmale (In re LTC Holdings, Inc.)

587 B.R. 25 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Jun 12, 2018

under title 11, and (4) proceedings related to a case under title 11. 54 The first three categories are considered "core" proceedings, and the last category "non-core" proceedings. 55 To the extent a proceeding fails to qualify … This clearly falls within the boundaries of "related to" jurisdiction for derivative claims.

In re Powell

511 B.R. 107 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. Illinois · May 6, 2014

The debtor would bear the burden to establish that a different method of calculation is appropriate. … The Debtors do not argue that the Deere profit sharing plan is ERISA-qualified. .

In Re Maylin

155 B.R. 605 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maine · Jun 9, 1993

But Taylor broadly states that, if neither the trustee nor a creditor objects, an exemption claim is established against all: even if the exemption is without foundation in law. … But, consistent with § 522(l), Rule 4003 and Taylor , the debtor can establish entitlement to an exemption, prima facie, by listing it specifically on his or her the schedules, designating clearly the basis for each exemption

First Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. Johnson (In Re Johnson)

82 B.R. 801 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · Feb 19, 1988

Based on the debtors’ original schedule of assets, all of the debtors’ property appears to either be encumbered or to qualify for exemption. … Both clearly had knowledge of the sale. 3 .

In re Firstenergy Solutions Corp.

596 B.R. 631 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jan 15, 2019

The Exception to the Automatic Stay Established by Bankruptcy Code Section 556 Does Not Apply to Meadville Because it is Not a Forward Contract Merchant. … Following the effective date of BAPCPA, the definition of "forward contract merchant" was expanded so that "entit[ies]," not merely "person[s]," qualified.

In Re Vale

110 B.R. 396 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Jan 23, 1989

Any person whose views are to the contrary has the burden of establishing that Congress was in error.) … The Court held that guns, bows and arrows, cameras, golf clubs, and a bicycle qualified as “household goods”. In Oswald v.

Berry v. Brown (In Re Brown)

43 B.R. 613 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Tennessee · Oct 23, 1984

On September 2, 1983 judgment was entered establishing debtor’s paternity of plaintiffs minor son born January 1, 1980. … This qualifying clause did not appear in section 17a(7) of the Bankruptcy Act, and represents a significant change.

In Re Crivilare

213 B.R. 721 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Illinois · Oct 9, 1997

At hearing, debtors’ counsel conceded that none of the individuals designated as “Clerk” are qualified as paralegals, for which such billing might be allowable. • Thus, the Court must conclude that itemizations for “Clerk … For this reason, the Court will exercise no leniency in reviewing the time itemi-zations here but will hold counsel to the established standards set forth and applied by the courts in the Central District cases.