Case law

In Re 68 West 127 Street, LLC

285 B.R. 838 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Nov 19, 2002

The building apparently qualifies as single asset real estate under section 101(5 IB) of the Bankruptcy Code. … As the Debtor’s only asset, the building clearly is necessary for the Debtor’s reorgani-

D'Angelo v. Parker (In Re Parker)

378 B.R. 365 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 1, 2007

Rule 59 permits the reconsideration of judgments if it is established that the judgment contains manifest errors of law or fact. … Finally, this case is clearly distinguishable from the situation in In re Zeller, 242 B.R. 84 (Bankr.S.D.Fla.1999), which was cited by the Plaintiff in her Motion for New Trial.

Bluebonnet Warehouse Corp. v. Julien Co. (In Re Julien Co.)

136 B.R. 765 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Tennessee · Feb 14, 1992

The language of § 7-209 is clearly more specific than that of § 1-102. … It may thus be concluded that the plaintiffs here qualify as prepetition bailees, rather than debtors.

Wessinger v. Spivey (In Re Galbreath)

286 B.R. 185 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia · Mar 14, 2002

Here, the property transfers were made on November 24, 1998, which date was clearly within the avoidability period. … Does it establish an obligation of a subgroup of signatories such as GCG and Galbreath?

Picard Ex Rel. Liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC v. Madoff (In Re Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC)

458 B.R. 87 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 22, 2011

creditor generally, and prove the existence of an actual, qualifying creditor at trial.”). … In Merkin I, this Court addressed virtually identical arguments, and found that they were at best premature, as section 546(e) provides an affirmative defense that, unless clearly established on the face of the Complaint,

Maids International, Inc. v. Ward (In Re Ward)

194 B.R. 703 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 16, 1996

Maids has developed a system for establishing and operating a household maintenance and cleaning service. … It concluded the clause qualified because it was stated to be compensation for “actual or threatened harm_” This is questionable.

In Re Table Talk, Inc.

22 B.R. 706 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Aug 27, 1982

The new president appears well-qualified for his task. He has focused on the chief business problems in the debtor’s life, and has taken concrete steps to address them. … The legislative history clearly states the standard: the protection must be needed and the costs must not be *713 disproportionately high.

In re Miller

496 B.R. 469 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · Jul 24, 2013

Once the debtor establishes these requirements, the burden is placed on an objecting party to show that the debtor is attempting to convert the case in bad faith.”). … Clearly, the Debtor’s statements and schedules contain omissions and inconsistencies; however, the court does not find any intent on behalf of the Debtor to file fraudulent or misleading statements.

DAK Industries, Inc. v. Dot-Line Transportation (In Re DAK Industries, Inc.)

195 B.R. 129 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · Aug 17, 1995

However, the history of preference recovery is long and established in the jurisprudence of bankruptcy law. See generally, h Collier on Bankruptcy § 547.01. … Given this, this Court need not consider whether the Dot-Line lien otherwise qualifies as a preference. B. Determination of Secured/Unsecured Status Under Section 506.

GULFCOAST IRREVOCABLE TRUST

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico · Dec 11, 2013

The movant “must either clearly establish a manifest error of law or must presen 22 newly discovered evidence.” Id. See also; BBVA v. Vazquez (In re Vazquez), 471 B.R. 752, 76 93 (B.A.P. … (Case No. 12-06338, Docke 24 No. 98, Case No. 12-06339, Docket No. 97 and Case No. 12-06340, Docket No. 97). 25 The court finds that the Debtors have failed to clearly establish a manifest error of la

In Re Brierwood Manor, Inc.

239 B.R. 709 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 12, 1999

Examination of the statutory text supports the proposition that the deletion by Congress was clearly an oversight. … Alvarez (In re Engel), 124 F.3d 567, 571 (3d Cir.1997), that a professional’s retention pursuant to § 327 does not establish a right to payment from the estate under § 330. 13 .

Sharon S. Brainard

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · May 25, 2023

Prior to the Petition Date, the debtor established the Fidelity IRA Account by depositing a check from a People’s United Bank checking account containing only proceeds of a “non-qualified” plan under ERISA. … In In re Ecle Kees, the former husband’s retirement accounts were clearly tax qualified, while here the debtor’s ex-spouse’s retirement account was a non-qualified plan.

In Re Sprolito

359 B.R. 423 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico · Sep 15, 2006

Educap Educap contends that educational loans are nondischargeable, as clearly disclosed in the Promissory Notes and on the proofs of claim. … BAP 2001). *427 Once the movant makes a prima facie showing that there are no genuine issues of material fact, the burden of proof shifts to the party opposing the motion for summary judgment to establish that there are questions

In Re Motors Liquidation Co.

447 B.R. 198 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 7, 2011

immunity for acts undertaken in connection with the case. … But none of the qualifying circumstances has been even argued to be applicable to the exculpation provisions here.

In Re Tudor

342 B.R. 540 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Dec 9, 2005

Whatever modifiers are used in a sentence, they must be placed so that they relate clearly to the words they modify.” Id. at 20 (quoting John L. … 214 , 273 N.E.2d 893, 895-96 (1971) (“Consideration of the [statute's] title is especially proper where, as in Ohio, ... there is a constitutional provision that no bill shall contain more than one subject, which shall be clearly

King Oil Field Services, LLP v. PricewaterhouseCoopers (In re Poseidon Concepts Corp.)

515 B.R. 811 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Sep 25, 2014

The distinction between the district courts, established under Article III of the Constitution, and the bankruptcy courts, established by Congress under its Article I legislative power, is not esoteric. … “The problem with literal application of § 157(b)(2)’s identification of core proceedings, though, is that it literally includes proceedings in which it is clearly unconstitutional for non-Article III bankruptcy judges to

Buffalo Molded Plastics, Inc. v. Plastic Mold Technology, Inc. (In Re Buffalo Molded Plastics, Inc.)

354 B.R. 731 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 28, 2006

D) 11 clearly identified the Shipped Tooling as an item held by Buffalo Molded for ultimate sale to GM. … Citing the deposition testimony of Nicholas Bogdanos, President of Buffalo Molded, PMT believes the tooling clearly has a long useful life.

Matthew Guy Landgraf

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 13, 2021

Neither the Texas Constitution nor the Texas Property Code clearly defines what is meant by “homestead.”66 In the case law, however, it has generally been described as “the dwelling house constituting the family residence … Section 41.0021(b) does not establish a new, different set of occupancy and use rules applicable only to settlors and beneficiaries of qualifying trusts.

Miller v. Blatstein (In Re Main, Inc.)

223 B.R. 457 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Aug 6, 1998

Consequently, it is clear that the use of the “Philly Rock” name by Airbev at its Airport establishment did not transfer to that establishment any ready-made customer base. … The very fact that the District Court significantly altered the November 7, 1997 orders, clearly establishes that at least the initial figure was not meant to be a final order.

Hackeling v. Rael Automatic Sprinkler Co. (In Re Luis Electrical Contracting Corp.)

165 B.R. 358 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · Oct 29, 1992

that none of the Defendant’s defenses is a so-called “real defense” to which a holder in due course is not immune under U.C.C. section 3-305. … The Debtor has clearly dealt with the Defendant and therefore takes the Notes subject to any of the Defendant’s valid defenses.