Case law

Kelsey v. Great Lakes Higher Education Corp.

287 B.R. 132 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Vermont · Oct 23, 2001

DISCUSSION The debtor seeks a final judgment discharging her student loan obligations owed to the defendants on the grounds that a preponderance of the evidence establishes that the debtor has met the test for establishing … Well qualified and substantiated expert testimony is essential.

In Re John Dawson & Associates, Inc.

289 B.R. 654 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 16, 2003

Each transaction exceeded the investment parameters established by Cameron. (TEX 7; CEX 18). … The findings made by the [trial] court clearly indicate the elements of a ratification ...” Id. at 182. Conclusion Here, Cameron is a sophisticated and experienced investor.

In Re Winston

416 B.R. 32 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. New York · May 7, 2009

Having established the purpose and legality of a provision of this nature, the court now turns to Ms. … [t]o deem a loan contractually current upon confirmation without qualifying language is premature and inconsistent with the Bankruptcy Code.” Hudak, 2008 WL 4850196 , at *4.

Staton Holdings, Inc. v. Mileski (In Re Mileski)

416 B.R. 210 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. North Carolina · Apr 28, 2009

Among these, the ruling establishes that the August 23rd agreement was the parties contract, not the August 11th document. This, in turn, established that Sta-ton had an unlimited product return right. … As we will see, these do not establish fraud of the sort contemplated by § 523(a)(2)(A). C.

Caccamo v. Pouliot (In Re Pouliot)

196 B.R. 641 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · May 30, 1996

It is well established that a plaintiff in a dischargeability action must establish the elements of his or her case by a preponderance of the evidence. Sheryl Corsi and David Corsy her husband v. Paul K. Berman, Dr. … to the extent the phrase “right to payment” is modified in the statute, the modifying language (“whether or not such right is ... ”) reflects Congress’ broad rather than restrictive view of the class of obligations that qualify

In Re Stewart

190 B.R. 846 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. Illinois · Jan 12, 1996

However, the bulk of those items are clearly pre-petition debts, the proof of claim does include them, and no objection to the proof of claim was filed. … The CREDITOR’S actions were clearly willful as it knew of the bankruptcy and acted with disregard for it.

In re Fraser's Boiler Serv., Inc.

593 B.R. 636 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Washington · Nov 20, 2018

The decision of the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Montana in Yellowstone Mountain Club, LLC is instructive on this issue: This court is bound by, and does not dispute the legal precedent established in Lowenschuss … "[T]he lines separating actions protected by immunity from actionable conduct are neither clearly nor easily drawn." Id. "[D]ecisions in this area have arrived at varied and often inconsistent results." Id. at 479 .

In Re Hedge

394 B.R. 463 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Sep 17, 2008

In the present matter, the VA disability payments qualify as “current monthly income” to the Hedges. The payments, made by the United States government, are paid by an entity as that term is defined in § 101(15). … That is because the statute clearly draws a distinction, in the precise language used by Congress in establishing the means test formula, between “applicable” expenses on the one hand and “actual” expenses on the other.

In Re Brady

361 B.R. 765 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 13, 2007

While the legislative history does contain “clearly expressed legislative intent” to identify debtors who can afford to repay their debts, and to compel them to do so, Congress established very clearly the fixed formulas … However, once established for the debtors, the applicable commitment period must then be read in the context of section 1325(b)(1)(B), as discussed above.

Rogers v. M & I Bank FSB (In Re Morgan)

449 B.R. 821 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · Apr 9, 2010

To support its conclusion, Defendant adds to the language of this subsection a qualifying reference that the sworn statement relate “to the loss of the security deed.” Defendant’s Brief in Support, at 7. … This statement is clearly missing from both First Franklin’s cancellation instruments.

In Re Neal

140 B.R. 634 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · Mar 8, 1992

Sunwest urges the court to establish a narrow federal definition of the terms for purposes of lien avoidance, rather than relying on state law definitions developed under the rubric of broadly-construed exemption statutes … So long as the tools otherwise qualify for exemption under subsection (b), which includes both state and federal exemptions, they are eligible for lien avoidance as well. 11 U.S.C. § 522 (f).

Elsinore Shore Associates v. Casino Control Commission (In Re Elsinore Shore Associates)

66 B.R. 723 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 29, 1986

The Penn Terra court established that the enforcement of Pennsylvania’s environmental laws was clearly an exercise of the state’s police and regulatory power as provided in 11 U.S.C. § 362 (b)(4). … Clearly, In re Greenwald is distinguishable from the case presently before the court.

In Re Elleco, Inc.

295 B.R. 797 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · Jun 14, 2002

In the Fourth Circuit, the guiding principle for determining whether a claim qualifies as an informal proof of claim is that there must be sufficient notice of the claim given during the course of the bankruptcy proceeding … Clearly, USF & G knew or should have known that it had standing to assert a contingent claim or that it could have conditioned its payment to contractors upon their timely filing and assignment of claims.

In Re Martin

417 B.R. 354 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. North Carolina · Jun 19, 2009

This deduction is provided for on line 55 of the Form 22C which calls for the entry of “Qualified retirement deductions.” … These purchases led to an increasing mound of indebtedness that clearly went beyond the financial ability of the Debtors.

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

87 B.R. 1011 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Dakota · Jun 24, 1988

It stated that neither of the qualifying clauses of Section 523(a)(7) would allow the discharge of restitution. Id. at 51-52 , 107 S.Ct. at 362 . … Although Wright’s criminal conviction would establish the requirement of willfulness, it does not establish that the acts were done with malice.

In Re Craft

321 B.R. 189 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 26, 2005

Even in cases such as Craft’s where the class is apparently clearly identifiable, actual notice may prove insufficient. … Bradford & Co., 827 F.2d 718, 726 (11th Cir.1987) (plaintiffs might not qualify as class representatives if they do not possess integrity necessary to carry out fiduciary role as class representatives); Cobell v.

In Re Greer

242 B.R. 389 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Oct 15, 1999

For example, intangible interests in property are clearly included within a debtor’s bankruptcy estate. Brown v. Dellinger (In re Brown), 734 F.2d 119 (2nd Cir.1984). … Schindler, 95 Ohio App.3d 277, 281 , 642 N.E.2d 404, 406 (9th Dist.1994) (the date of the filing of a bankruptcy petition is the guidepost in establishing a person’s rights in bankruptcy regardless of any later change in

Interco Inc. v. ILGWU National Retirement Fund (In Re Interco Inc.)

137 B.R. 993 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Missouri · Jan 9, 1992

Han-rahan was qualified as an expert witness in MPPAA arbitrations. Mr. Hanrahan testified that the average time expended on arbitrations in cases comparable to the Debtors’ cases is 1.8 years. … On April 18, 1991, this Court entered Standing Order # 3 captioned, “Setting Claims Bar Date, Establishing Claims Processing And Objection Procedures, And Establishing Claims Estimation Procedures Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §

Makoroff v. Allegheny Graphics, Inc. (In Re Allegheny Label Inc.)

128 B.R. 947 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 28, 1991

Roughen denies that certain elements required for a preferential transfer have been established. … The trustee has failed to clearly and convincingly establish that this sum also was part of the consideration paid by Graphics.

Pursue Energy Corp. v. Mississippi State Tax Commission

338 B.R. 283 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Mississippi · Mar 31, 2005

Findings of fact by the bankruptcy courts are to be reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard. Id.; see also Bankruptcy Rule 8013. 1 Conclusions of law are reviewed de novo. … issues; (2) lack of any connection with or interference with the bankruptcy case; (3) whether the other proceeding involves the debtor as a fiduciary; (4) whether a specialized tribunal with the necessary expertise has been established