Case law

United States Trustee v. Anthonys (In re Anthonys)

539 B.R. 820 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Alaska · Oct 22, 2015

Schuster, and attempted to qualify his interest as being something less than a true ownership interest. … The transfers clearly fell within the two year disclosure period. Further, the debtor was not forthcoming about either transfer. He only revealed his sale of the Kingsmen property to Ms.

In Re Tanenbaum

210 B.R. 182 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Jun 26, 1997

of “(1) the debtor’s manipu *186 lations which reduced the creditors in this case to one; (2) the debtor’s failure to make significant lifestyle adjustments or efforts to repay; (3) the fact that the petition was filed clearly … In holding that the clear, unequivocal time limits established by the Bankruptcy Rules are to be strictly construed, the Circuit Court set a standard that deviation from those time limits is seldom acceptable, even if the

In Re DiMartino

97 B.R. 139 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Rhode Island · Mar 24, 1989

The plaintiffs are also entitled to recover rental profits lost to vacancy on account of the unfinished units, if they can be established by reliable evidence. Urico v. … Clearly the term does not embrace the construction "complete."

Cardiello v. Casale (In Re Phillips Group, Inc.)

382 B.R. 876 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 22, 2008

A specific provision of a mortgage may survive the judgment if the mortgage clearly evidences an intention by the parties to preserve the effectiveness of that provision. 991 F.2d at 1095 . … In addition, the discussion in Perry at 945 F.2d at 66 concerned whether a foreclosure judgment lien qualified as a security interest for purposes of § 1382(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Crews v. First Colony Life Insurance (In Re Barker)

168 B.R. 773 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jun 3, 1994

Clearly, Barker was concerned about an investment in stocks that was losing money, with losses in the amount of $1,400.00. … This type of cat-and-mouse pre-bankruptcy planning hinders and delays all creditors involved and is clearly prohibited by the Code. 3.

Cook v. Cook

220 B.R. 918 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · Oct 9, 1997

The Defendants’ second argument was not clearly articulated, but appears to run as follows. In removing the state-court action, the Defendants had the option of using either § 1441 or § 1452. … both in person-am and in rem jurisdiction, rather than to establish exclusivity over bankruptcy matters in the reorganization court.”

Boone v. Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (In Re Boone)

235 B.R. 828 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · Jul 29, 1998

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW As initial matters, the Court notes that the FDIC has waived any claim to sovereign immunity by the filing of its proof of claim and failure to assert such a defense in this proceeding. Anderson v. … The Debtor also testified to a loss of $2,500.00 from the loss of his homestead exemption but did not qualify how this loss was incurred.

Neary v. Happel (In Re Happel)

394 B.R. 915 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Sep 15, 2008

In re Hamilton, 390 B.R. 618, 625 (Bankr.E.D.Ark.2008) (“Omissions from schedules qualify as a false oath as if they are made knowingly and with fraudulent intent.”); In re Glenn, 335 B.R. 703, 707 (Bankr.W.D.Mo.2005); In … Even if the debtor lacked a conscious intent to deceive, the record is clear that her conduct clearly evinced a reckless disregard for the truth.

United States Trustee v. Harshaw (In Re Harshaw)

345 B.R. 518 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 27, 2006

in immunizing such cost reductions from a § 707(b) analysis by simply undertaking to accomplish such reductions themselves post-petition; consequently, instead of shielding such cost reductions from a § 707(b) analysis, … The Debtors also feebly attempt to distinguish Anes from the instant matter on the ground that Anes "concerned the propriety of repayment of funds borrowed from a qualified 401(k) plan and not[, as in the instant matter,]

Miller v. Burns (In Re Burns)

395 B.R. 756 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 8, 2008

Although 522(q) clearly incorporates the time threshold requiring a debtor to acquire a homestead interest within 1,215 days prior to filing bankruptcy before allowing a creditor to object, Miller somewhat inexplicably ignores … Section 503 (b)(1) or *769 under a qualified State tuition plan as defined in 26 U.S.C. Section 529 (b)(1).”

In re Pick & Save, Inc.

478 B.R. 110 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico · Sep 13, 2012

The Bankruptcy Code does not clearly establish when a right to payment arises, but caselaw has held that claims “arise[ ] ... when all transactions necessary for liability have occurred, regardless of whether the claim was … (In re Mammoth Mart, Inc.), 536 F.2d 950 (1st Cir.1976), the First Circuit established a two-prong test to determine whether or not a claim qualifies as an administrative expense: (1) the right to payment must arise from

Nielsen v. United States (In Re Nielsen)

143 B.R. 93 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · May 29, 1992

A formal assessment by the IRS is given the force of a judgment, and establishes a prima facie case of tax liability. *97 Bull v. … The IRS has not raised the defense of sovereign immunity. 2 . Section 6703 provides: § 6703.

Federal Storage & Moving Co. v. Allied Van Lines, Inc. (In re Federal Storage & Moving Co.)

32 B.R. 659 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 2, 1983

The question for this court to resolve, therefore, is whether or not the evidence establishes a right to relief on Federal’s claim. … A committed unit consists of a truck, trailer and qualified driver.

AASI Creditor Liquidating Trust ex rel. Welt v. Oracle USA, Inc. (In re All American Semiconductor, Inc.)

490 B.R. 418 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Jan 25, 2013

And yet, the Complaint alleges, “CSS was not qualified to design and implement the ERP System for All American. In fact, despite its claimed reputation of qualified aid and expertise ... … Affirmative defenses are not properly considered on a motion to dismiss, unless the “complaint affirmatively and clearly shows the conclusive applicability of the defense to bar the action.” Jackson v.

John Matthew Ikalowych

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Apr 15, 2021

So, the words “commercial” and “business” are clearly synonyms. … Perhaps the most well-known use of the term “commercial activities” in a federal statute is in the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (the “FSIA”), which endorses the view that foreign states are “not immune” “insofar as

In re Ennia Caribe Holding N.V.

594 B.R. 631 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Dec 20, 2018

The plain language of the LTV establishes that rehabilitation proceedings pursuant to the Emergency Regulations are collective in nature. … The CBCS, as a national regulatory authority tasked with oversight of the insurance industry, clearly qualifies as an authority competent to control or supervise a foreign proceeding.

In re Dickerson

510 B.R. 289 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Idaho · May 1, 2014

Again, without dispute, the evidence submitted at the hearing established that Debtors had paid all but $150 of the fines Mr. … This is another, distinct reason that those debts do not qualify for an exception to discharge under § 523(a)(7) as noted in Kelly .

Tabas Ex Rel. Bankruptcy Estate of Flagship Healthcare, Inc. v. Greenleaf Ventures, Inc. (In Re Flagship Healthcare, Inc.)

269 B.R. 721 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Nov 13, 2001

The Trustee has alleged sufficient facts to state a negligence claim on behalf of the Debtor (for which the Trustee clearly has standing) and has alleged that the Debtor was damaged by the negligence. … Notwithstanding the high standard for obtaining dismissal of a complaint on proximate causation grounds, the Motion argues that the “superceding and intervening act” doctrine immunizes the Defendants from liability in the

Fisher v. Sellas (In Re Lake States Commodities, Inc.)

272 B.R. 233 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 11, 2002

First, the Court determines if the proposed expert qualifies as an expert. In the absence of any objection in this regard and in light of Malek’s impressive training and experience, Malek qualifies as an expert. 55. … Clearly, it is not an opinion formulated by him after an audit or any search for the truth of the actual amount of the indebtedness. An expert’s testimony cannot be used to subvert rules of evidence.

In re Gregory

487 B.R. 444 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · Mar 7, 2013

each asset claimed as exempt on this Claim of Exemptions, the debtor asserts that the value listed is the actual fair market value on the date of the petition, and that the nature and/or use of the asset is such that it qualifies … The debtors have clearly sought to maximize their exemptions by inserting this provision.