Case law

In Re Glaubitz

436 B.R. 99 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Aug 19, 2010

The Navistar guaranty is clearly absolute. … Since these guarantees cause their noncontingent unsecured liabilities to exceed the amount that would qualify them as chapter 13 debtors, they are not eligible. A separate order will be entered.

In Re Victor

341 B.R. 775 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Mexico · May 3, 2006

(citations omitted); Fingado, 113 B.R. at 40 (“In New Mexico, there is a clearly stated presumption of community property.”). The presumption of community property can be overcome by a preponderance of evidence. … The party asserting the separate character of property has the burden of going forward with the evidence to establish the separate ownership interest. Id.; See also Campbell v.

Votruba v. Florida Department of Education (In Re Votruba)

310 B.R. 698 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Jun 16, 2004

In the absence of clearly expressed contrary legislative intent, the statutory language must be regarded as conclusive.... … The first prong of the Brunner test has clearly been met by the Debtor.

In Re Harvard Industries, Inc.

352 B.R. 613 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 20, 2006

Applying those principles, the court found that the bankruptcy expenses did not qualify as specified liability losses. … The burden of clearly showing the right to the claimed deduction is on the party claiming the deduction. INDOPCO, Inc. v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 503 U.S. 79, 84 , 112 S.Ct. 1039 , 117 L.Ed.2d 226 (1992).

In Re Curry Printers, Inc.

135 B.R. 564 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 4, 1991

Ordinarily this will be the contractual rental pro rata temporis, unless it is shown that the contractual rental itself is clearly unreasonable. … In any event, the analysis should only center around the reasonable rental value of the property as established either by the lease rate or by the rate established by the rebutting evidence presented by a party.

In re Lowery

272 B.R. 317 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Dec 10, 2001

In determining whether a moving party has met its burden of establishing that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that it is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, a court must draw inferences from the … The burden is on Cadle to show there is no genuine dispute that policies 2 and 6 do not qualify as exempt pursuant to § 222.14 and that there is no genuine dispute that the cash surrender value of policy 1 resulted from a

Pollock v. Pollock (In Re Pollock)

150 B.R. 584 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 30, 1992

As the Court noted in In re Yeates, (Citation omitted) “A debt could be in the nature of support under § 523(a)(5) even though it would not legally qualify as alimony or support under state law”. … Schulman’s testimony all seem to establish that the one hundred fifteen thousand dollar ($115,000.00) payment was in consideration of the release of two parcels of real estate and was clearly offered in lieu of further support

In Re Massie

231 B.R. 249 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Mar 26, 1999

These circumstances clearly support debtor’s subjective bad faith in seeking bankruptcy protection. … We find Bock has failed to establish debt- or’s fraud in filing her Chapter 12 petition, and therefore deny his motion to convert under section 1208(d).

Crum v. Blixseth (In Re Big Springs Realty LLC)

426 B.R. 860 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Montana · Mar 18, 2010

Instead, “[t]o establish a substantial likelihood of success on the merits, Plaintiff must show ‘a fair chance of success.’ ” Rubin v. … BSR’s bank statements clearly show that Blixseth had drained all the cash out of his “veritable cash cow,” by August 12, 2008.

Guiliano v. Almond Investment Co. (In Re Carolina Fluid Handling Intermediate Holding Corp.)

467 B.R. 743 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Mar 14, 2012

Plain and simple, Almond side stepped the normal protocol to assume and assign contracts in 2009 in an attempt to immunize their notable exposure to receipt of preference transfers. … of finding that the bankruptcy court is required to make with regard to all new contracts entered into by the trustee without prior court approval during the administration of the estate in order for those contracts to qualify

Morton Shoe Companies, Inc. v. Herbert & Boghosian, Inc.

36 B.R. 14 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 4, 1983

It was undisputed at trial that the transfer qualified under subsections (A), (C), and (D). … The architect, however, did not certify until December 8, 1981 and January 12, 1982, clearly after the date of payment.

In Re Huelbig

299 B.R. 721 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Rhode Island · Oct 1, 2003

Having said that, the Debtors clearly do not qualify for Chapter 13, and Allstate’s Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED. … The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Eighth Circuit has stated: “The key factor in distinguishing liquidated from unliquidated claims is not the extent of the dispute nor the amount of evidence required to establish the

Keenan v. Pyle (In Re Keenan)

372 B.R. 496 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. California · Jun 1, 2007

Clearly, the Courts’ impartiality might reasonably be questioned because this complaint includes claims that Judge Bowie deprived the Keenans of their constitutional rights and colluded with the Defendants to deplete the … A judge is presumed qualified to hear a proceeding and the Plaintiffs have the burden of proving otherwise. First Interstate Bank v. Murphy, Weir & Butler, 210 F.3d 983 , 987 (9th Cir.2000).

In re WM Six Forks, LLC

502 B.R. 88 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · Sep 23, 2013

disbursements” included payments made directly to a secured creditor by a third-party from the sale proceeds of *93 property serving as security and holding that “a plain language reading of the statute shows that Congress clearly … The congressional purpose underlying the United States Trustee Program and quarterly fees lend additional support to a broad reading of the term “disbursements” in § 1930(a)(6). 3 Section 1930(a)(6) was established by Congress

Roberts v. Oliver (In Re Oliver)

414 B.R. 361 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · May 22, 2009

Under Tennessee law, “the rule with reference to gifts inter vivos ... is that intention to give and delivery of the subject of the gift must clearly appear[ and d]oubts must be resolved against the gift. … Additionally, the Defendant clearly disclosed these monthly payments in his schedules, not listing them as gifts upon the advice of his counsel.

Harstad v. First American Bank (In Re Harstad)

155 B.R. 500 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · Jun 30, 1993

Congress has clearly spoken: I have jurisdiction. B. Do the Debtors’ Have Standing to Pursue Their Preference Action? … Turning to the statute, section 1123(b)(3)(B) on its face is devoid of language quantifying or qualifying the language required by a debtor attempting to retain preference actions.

Dubois v. Fales & Fales, P.A. (In Re Dubois)

306 B.R. 423 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maine · Mar 18, 2004

Section 522(f) establishes a debtor’s ability to avoid the fixing of a judicial lien on exempt property. … Clearly, the Maine residence exemption statute, by limiting the exemption to $25,000 against a single category of lien claim (i.e., a lien predating the statute’s effective date)' — a category not included in § 522(c) — is

In re Rama Group of Companies, Inc.

264 B.R. 267 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. New York · May 16, 2001

The Court holds that qualifiers like “without prejudice to,” “subject to the rights of,” “with reservation of,” etc. may have very distinct and different meanings. … Hence this writer offers the suggestion that sometimes a party suffers what might be called “the curse of the ruling that is not clearly adverse.”

In Re Ron Matusalem & Matusa of Florida, Inc.

158 B.R. 514 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Aug 13, 1993

Though clearly an academic expert, Professor Barsby lives in the Ivory Tower of Academics, not the market place. … He was not credible and not qualified to testify as an expert on the interpretation of the opinion of Judge Ryskamp in the U.S. District Court.

Tybee v. Coker (In re Coker)

569 B.R. 521 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia · Mar 28, 2017

Thus, to qualify for a 1031 Exchange, they were required to designate a replacement property by January 9, 2009. … reasonable, in part because the debtor had a good reputation in the community and had a wealthy family with valuable assets); see also In re Davenport, 508 Fed.Appx. ,937 (11th Cir. 2013)(fmding of reasonable reliance not clearly