Case law

In Re Vienna Park Properties

132 B.R. 517 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Oct 4, 1991

Harvey and Britton were each qualified as expert appraisers. Tr. 4/29/91 at 28-31; Tr. 5/20/91 at 204. Mr. Wudske was qualified as an expert in the field of property management and related matters. Tr. 4/26/91 at 37-47. … The Secured Creditors, however, have not established a sufficiently strong link between Mr.

Levin v. Greco (In Re Greco)

397 B.R. 102 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 20, 2008

Under BAPCPA, the payee requirement is even more clearly set out, as separate paragraph (A) in the § 101(14A) definition of domestic support obligation. … A child representative is not a “legal guardian. ” Although Levin does not make the argument, it might be questioned whether, as a “child representative” under Illinois law, he would qualify as a “legal guardian” — one of

Buchwald Capital Advisors, LLC v. Papas (In re Greektown Holdings, LLC)

516 B.R. 445 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · Aug 12, 2014

Because the Transaction qualified as a “debt transaction,” the MGCB conducted an investigation over several months, pursuant to its authority and procedures. See Mich. Admin. Code r. § 432.1509. … Defendants contend that Michigan courts have clearly and consistently upheld this basic principle under the term “preemption.” For example, in Kraft v.

Walls v. Hicks (In re Hicks)

530 B.R. 912 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · May 22, 2015

The Divorce Decree clearly awards the Plaintiff an interest in 60% of the Defendant’s military retirement pension as an equitable division of property. … No. 17 at 8-9. .Defendant also asks the Court to affirmatively hold that the remaining obligations do not qualify as domestic support obligations not dischargeable under § 523(a)(5) so he can use the finding as res judicata

In re ANR Advance Transportation Co.

283 B.R. 737 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Aug 28, 2002

Disability discrimination requires a showing (1) of disability within the meaning of the ADA, (2) that claimant is qualified to perform the essential functions of the job (with or without a reasonable accommodation), and … Westphal, 78 F.3d 1252, 1257 (7th Cir.1996), declared: ... being a pro se litigant does not give a party unbridled license to disregard clearly communicated court orders.

Alaska Teamster-Employer Pension Trust v. Wise (In Re Wise)

120 B.R. 537 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Alaska · Oct 16, 1990

It indicates that: The Alaska Act is a substantial adoption of the major provisions of the Uniform Act, but it contains numerous variations, omissions and additional matters which cannot be clearly indicated by statutory … The Wise Security Deposits— Conversely, the failure to pay the $8,450.00 of security deposits Wise collected after the Wespac foreclosure qualifies for non-dischargeability.

Pereira v. United States (In Re Rodriguez)

50 B.R. 576 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · Jun 20, 1985

The IRS maintains that the “receive more” element, (§ 547(b)(5)), has not been established, thus precluding summary judgment as to the non-trust fund monies. … Section 507(a)(6) provides that those taxes which qualify must be paid in the sixth order of priority.

Blue Cross of Western PA v. Monsour Medical Center (In Re Monsour Medical Center)

8 B.R. 606 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 30, 1981

In this case, the modification of the 1976 Agreement by Blue Cross and Monsour was established by both an oral agreement and a written agreement. … Section x(v) accords HHS broad authority to establish regulations governing the precise method of cost calculation.

In Re Reynolds

470 B.R. 138 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Apr 9, 2012

[S]everal factors typically inform the decision whether to apply the doctrine in a particular case: First, a party’s later position must be “clearly inconsistent” with its earlier position. … [Debtor] qualified as a party in interest with respect to the amended proof of claim because its disallowance would have produced a surplus in the estate.”).

Hassett v. Ganz (In Re O.P.M. Leasing Services, Inc.)

21 B.R. 986 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jul 16, 1982

The Trustee was so appointed, has duly qualified and is the acting Trustee in this case. … It was merely because the employer in Hadden had indicated that he was not seeking affirmative recovery, a fact clearly not present herein, that the Court in Hadden denied the employer recovery.

In Re Enyedi

371 B.R. 327 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 12, 2007

Based on his disclosure to the court, Attorney Doyle clearly has a contractual obligation to the Debtors to prepare and file the amended schedules at issue, in addition to rendering legal services to the Debtors "for all … serving under section 586(f) of title 28, surrender to the trustee all property of the estate and any recorded information, including books, documents, records, and papers, relating to property of the estate, whether or not immunity

In Re Four Star Financial Services, Inc.

444 B.R. 428 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · Jan 28, 2011

. § 1640 (e); (3) any recovery by Hammond should be limited in amount by § 1640(a)(1)(B); (4) Claim No. 9 does not qualify for priority under Bankruptcy Code § 507(a)(7); and (5) the Iowa default judgment against 900 Capital … In § 507(d), Congress clearly appears to have limited who may assert priority only by excluding subrogees, not claimants.

Miller v. Greystone Business Credit II, LLC (In re USA Detergents, Inc.)

418 B.R. 533 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Oct 16, 2009

Clearly, USAD was reiterating GBC’s argument and was arguing that GBC had failed to meet its burden. The Court is satisfied that judicial estoppel does not apply. D. … In order to establish a case for aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty, a plaintiff must establish: “(1) the existenee of a fiduciary relationship; (2) proof that the fiduciary breached its duty; (3) proof that a defendant

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. Austin Financial Services, Inc. (In Re KDI Holdings, Inc.)

277 B.R. 493 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 8, 1999

Under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), “[i]t is the burden of the party who seeks the exercise of jurisdiction in his favor ... clearly to allege facts demonstrating that he is a proper party to invoke judicial resolution of the dispute … However, had the Exclusion Period expired without the Committee commencing this adversary-proceeding, Austin and Schneider would be immune from suit based on the Austin Loans, and the ability to review their roles in the

In Re Knize

210 B.R. 773 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jun 17, 1997

Debtors clearly misread the Bankruptcy Code when arguing that an unsecured debt over $250,000 should be discounted to what their Plan offers in determining eligibility. … Therefore, for purposes of qualifying under § 109(e), it is only relevant how much the debtor owes, not how much the debtor actually intends to pay or can pay or will pay through the Plan.

Osberg v. Halling (In Re Halling)

449 B.R. 911 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Wisconsin · May 9, 2011

The debtor sought but did not qualify for a $45,000.00 loan from Hiawatha National Bank. To help his mother, Mr. … As to the first issue, the loan in question was clearly unusual for both Mr. Hailing and his mother.

Humes v. LVNV Funding, L.L.C. (In re Humes)

496 B.R. 557 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jul 17, 2013

Martin qualified her answer by saying she would “need to look at the ledger card to make sure that [the charge] actually happened.” Transcript of Record at 193. … The fact that Hosto is also a law firm does not render it immune from liability under the FDCPA.

Speer v. Educational Credit Management Corp. (In Re Speer)

272 B.R. 186 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · Sep 6, 2001

He pays child support of $180.00 per month which support payment was established in 1989. Mr. Speer has never missed a payment. … In fact, the food expense is clearly understated. Mr.

Dawn Buckingham, MD, Commissioner v. Pearl Resources LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 28, 2025

Each witness responded to questions clearly, completely, and directly.33 Thus, the Court finds that each witness is credible and gives equal weight to the testimony of each witness. III. … initially developed without any legislative or constitutional enactment.157 Sovereign immunity encompasses immunity from suit, which bars a suit unless the state has consented, and immunity from liability, which protects

Official Committee Of Unsecured Creditors v. BlockFi Inc.

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 10, 2023

Sovereign Immunity The United States’ argument with respect to sovereign immunity is inextricably tied to its jurisdictional argument. … Because sovereign immunity is jurisdictional in nature, see FDIC v. Meyer, 510 U.S. at 475, if unequivocal waiver is not established, the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the issues raised.