Case law

Society Bank, N.A. v. Sinder (In Re Sinder)

102 B.R. 978 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 28, 1989

All “reasonable time” contemplated by the provisions of Rule 17, to the extent such time provisions would be applicable in this proceeding, has long since expired and the real party in interest, the appointed qualified and … It is clearly in the interest of both parties to arrange for the prompt scheduling and completion of the proposed Rule 2001/ examination.

Educational Credit Management Corp. v. Barnes

318 B.R. 482 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Dec 15, 2004

In short, the Trustee’s analysis seeks to probe more deeply into the cost structure in an effort to establish inequities. … Clearly, the Trustee has the right to recover the costs incurred in connection with collecting a delinquent loan where that obligation is rooted in the loan agreement itself.

Jubber v. Sleater (In Re Bedrock Marketing, LLC)

404 B.R. 929 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Utah · Apr 27, 2009

Sleater do not qualify under the residual exception standard of Rule 807. Additionally, the statements are also inadmissible under Rule 801(d)(2)(D). … statements are inappropriate in an affidavit opposing summary judgment, which may only properly contain admissible facts upon which the declarant is competent to testify. 27 The Court determines that the Defendant has faded to establish

Neochem Corp. v. Behring International, Inc. (In Re Behring International, Inc.)

61 B.R. 896 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Jun 11, 1986

Imposition of a constructive trust clearly thwarts the policy of ratable distribution and should not be impressed cavalierly. … As noted in 89 C.J.S. § 14: Resulting and constructive trusts, while frequently confused, are clearly distinguishable.

Feagan v. Townson

572 B.R. 785 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · Sep 6, 2016

The Court may not disturb the Bankruptcy Court’s factual findings, however, unless such findings are clearly erroneous. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8013. … First, the Supreme Court noted that because Congress meant “the means test to approximate the debtor’s reasonable expenditures on essential items, a debtor should be required to qualify for a deduction by actually incurring

Lawrence v. TPG Capital Management, L.P. (In re Hellas Telecommunications (Luxembourg) II SCA )

526 B.R. 499 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Mar 9, 2015

While such a transfer must be made by, to, or on behalf of a financial intermediary, “a transfer may qualify for the section 546(e) safe harbor even if the financial intermediary is merely a conduit.” … Sec., LLC), 326 B.R. 505, 517-18 (Bankr.S.D.N.Y.2005)). 11 “In such circumstances, courts will allow allegations of circumstantial evidence to establish fraudulent intent, such as the well-established ‘badges of fraud.’ ”

Meyer v. Argent Mortgage Co. (In Re Meyer)

379 B.R. 529 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 29, 2007

Violations of those two laws, Plaintiffs correctly point out, establish liability under UDAP. … Accordingly, they cannot establish UDAP liability on that basis.

Perkins v. United States (In Re Perkins)

216 B.R. 220 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Oct 10, 1997

The Bankruptcy Code clearly provides the following exceptions to discharge: (a) A discharge under section 727 ... of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt— (1) for a tax or a customs duty— (A) of … This section, together with 26 U.S.C. § 7422 (a), constitutes a waiver by the United States of its sovereign immunity with respect to refund suits by taxpayers to recover internal revenue taxes alleged to have been erroneously

Toledano v. Kittay (In Re Toledano)

299 B.R. 284 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Aug 7, 2003

Thus, the Second Circuit clearly established that (i) the term “lease” in a federal statute is defined under federal law, and (ii) a debtor/tenant’s rights under a rent stabilized lease (or rent controlled lease) in New York … Burger Boys, however, clearly notes the distinction.

Gugino v. Rowley (In re Floyd)

540 B.R. 747 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Idaho · Nov 10, 2015

On the evidentiary record presented, Defendant does not qualify as an insider under the definition found in § 101(31)(A). Trustee therefore argues that Defendant is, instead, a “non-statutory insider.” … There was clearly an ongoing business relationship between them, with several facets. 12 But the evi *756 dence did not show that Defendant could exert control because of that relationship, so that the transaction at issue

In Re Vallambrosa Holdings, LLC

411 B.R. 899 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia · Mar 27, 2009

The Court has heard several hours of testimony by two eminently qualified appraisers, Joel Crisler and Joel Pakula. … In making that allowance, Crisler and the Court are clearly giving Debtor the benefit of the doubt.

Brant v. Gerardo (In Re Gerardo Leasing, Inc.)

173 B.R. 379 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Oct 3, 1994

He has qualified and has been acting as such since his appointment. … This line of precedence is clearly distinguishable, however, from the case here.

Lev Investments, LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · Jul 26, 2022

This is clearly and action seeking a 14 monetary remedy. 15 16 SUMMARY JUDGMENT VERSUS … There 18 are clearly material facts with genuine issues of dispute.

John W. Lafferty, III and Constance A. Lafferty

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 16, 2019

solicited from the Debtor, counsel for the Debtors responded by stating that the Insider Distributions were “listed as expenses, and I don’t really see that there should be any conflict as to whether it was income when it’s clearly … It also establishes stable sources of income moving forward.

In re LHC, LLC

497 B.R. 281 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Jul 16, 2013

Pakter, also a CPA and certified fraud examiner, was qualified by the Court as an expert in forensic accounting and business strategies for distressed entities. IV. … If the debtor clearly appears incapable of discharging those duties, appointment of a trustee is not only warranted but required.

In re Carroll

586 B.R. 775 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California · Jun 6, 2018

That court then further clearly shows that this is not merely a debtor says she didn't know so the estate does not acquire the claim under 11 U.S.C. § 541 ruling, but one in which: a. " the underlying facts do not establish … That cannot be the law; 541 clearly states that a bankruptcy estate is established at "the commencement of [the] case."

In Re Dalip

194 B.R. 597 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 3, 1996

Economic pressure and even the *602 possibility of severe financial loss also do not qualify as duress. As stated in Higgins v. … The basic principles of res judicata in Illinois are well-established.

Drennan v. Drennan (In Re Drennan)

161 B.R. 661 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · Nov 9, 1993

Paragraph (5) of subsection (a) establishes the principle that alimony is nondischargeable. Subparagraph (B) states that a debt merely designated as support is dischargeable unless it actually is support. … She clearly could not afford, at the time of the divorce, to find an alternate residence without those funds. Mrs. Drennan told the debtor at the time of the divorce she needed those funds to live.

Kerr

United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · Jan 13, 2026

Second, 7 “[t]he judges [both the State Court judge and the undersigned Bankruptcy Court judge] 8 have absolute judicial immunity and the bankruptcy trustee has absolute quasi-judicial 9 immunity.” … Kerr’s lawsuits against the undersigned Bankruptcy 5 Judge sufficient to establish any “reasonabl[e]” question of any lack of impartiality, nor 6 to establish any “personal bias or prejudice.”

In Re Hoffinger Industries, Inc.

307 B.R. 112 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jan 14, 2004

Clearly, adjustments to this component will have to be made with either a firm conclusion date or an adequate and acceptable vehicle for amendment. … As stated above, this is clearly not a mass tort case.