Case law

Bayer Employees Federal Credit Union v. Sapp (In Re Sapp)

364 B.R. 618 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. West Virginia · Mar 26, 2007

Palmer stated that the Debtor’s debt to income ratio was O. 32, *629 which qualified him for the loan. … See, e.g., In re Treadwell, 699 F.2d 1050, 1051 (11th Cir.1983) (“[L]ove and affection are clearly insufficient to protect the transfers from the Trustee....

United Air Lines, Inc. v. UMB Bank, N.A. (In Re UAL Corp.)

374 B.R. 625 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 24, 2007

As discussed below, the evidence presented at a trial of this issue establishes that the value of the leasehold is $33,455,055. … Therefore the taxable equivalent of the current yield to maturity of GARBs is not by itself adequate to establish a discount rate.

Daniel H. Golden, as Litigation Trustee of the QHC v. Community Health Systems, Inc.

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Mar 16, 2023

The Plaintiffs contend that whether the safe harbor of § 546(e) protects the Spin-Off Dividend requires a fact-based inquiry and should be considered in a motion to dismiss only if “the defense is clearly established on … -2 (a qualifying participant) as a subsequent transferee.

Sally F Bentley

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Nov 9, 2020

In contrast, Debtor argues the plain language of Section 3631.1 clearly exempts the Annuity. … The initial fact which must be established is the balance in the account immediately preceding the deposit of the exempt funds.

In Re Rodrigues

370 B.R. 467 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 5, 2007

(ERISA qualified),” which he valued at $-0-, as well as an “IRA with Fidelity,” which he valued at $11,501.00. … Long revealed that “[i]n spite of the well known and clearly understood law in this area, the Suffolk *475 Probate Court ... improperly reopened the ease” and discharged,the attachment.

Michigan Unemployment Insurance Agency v. Kozlowski (In re Kozlowski)

547 B.R. 222 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · Mar 25, 2016

They do not establish that the fraud penalty also is not covered by § 523(a)(2). 4. … Section 1328(a)(2) is clearly a list of nondisehargeable debts.

In re Harris

522 B.R. 804 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · Dec 24, 2014

The Local Standards establish expense standards for housing and transportation expenditures. … The dicta in Ransom clearly requires that the Debtors be limited to the Local Standard of $885.00 for their mortgage payment.

In Re S.N.A. Nut Co.

186 B.R. 98 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Aug 31, 1995

The Court finds that the intent and agreement were that if Alimenta was outbid it was entitled to apply for a breakup fee, but if no sale was approved Alimenta could attempt to qualify itself under 11 U.S.C. § 503 (b) as … Although “substantial contribution” is not defined in the Code, case law has established that for an entity to recover under § 503(b) it must show that (1) the services were rendered to benefit all parties in the case and

Bridgeport Jai Alai, Inc. v. Autotote Systems, Inc. (In Re Bridgeport Jai Alai, Inc.)

215 B.R. 651 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · Dec 29, 1997

The evidence establishes that a better reading of the agreements is that the 1995 Agreement established a different method to calculate payment for totalisator services for the life of that contract, and at the end of the … That reading establishes two contracts with two different fee arrangements during two time periods.

Fox v. Ridgway (In re Ridgway)

476 B.R. 473 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Mississippi · Nov 10, 2011

An equitable distribution of the marital assets in the total sum of $265,000.00; $ 165,000.00 of which was payable within ten days, and the remaining $100,000.00 was represented by a Qualified Domestic Relations Order. 2. … These findings are supported by the record and are not clearly erroneous. ...

Hasset v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield (In Re O.P.M. Leasing Services, Inc.)

46 B.R. 661 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Feb 27, 1985

BCBS ' asserts that the Trustee has not established the first element of a preferential transfer under § 547 of the Code, because the release of the escrow deposit was not a transfer of OPM’s property. … However, § 541(d) qualifies the otherwise broad scope of this definition by providing that “[pjroperty in which the debtor holds, as of the commencement of the case, only legal title and not an equitable interest ... becomes

Enviro-Lite Solutions Inc v. First Class Electrical Services LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 20, 2022

gatekeeping role is not a substitute for the adversarial process.41 Daubert and its principles apply to all expert testimony, not just “scientific” testimony.42 The party proffering expert testimony has the burden of establishing … both Hamilton and Daniel, ECISD’s amended Rule 26(a)(1) initial disclosures states that the general subject of their testimony will be based on reports, deposition testimony, and mental impressions.81 To establish

Foreman Industries, Inc. v. Broadway Sand & Gravel (In Re Foreman Industries, Inc.)

59 B.R. 145 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 24, 1986

The plaintiff established a preferential transfer under 11 U.S.C. § 547 (b) in the amount of $845.87; and 6. The defendant did not establish an exception under 11 U.S.C. § 547 (c)(1) or (c)(2). I. … If Congress had intended to make a basic change in the preference concept, it is not unreasonable to assume that such an intention would have been clearly and unambiguously expressed (footnote omitted).

In Re Gingerella

148 B.R. 157 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Rhode Island · Dec 11, 1992

At the July 16 hearing, the Debtor requested a second continuance to solicit purchase agreements from qualified non-profit organizations. … This language clearly appears to vest discretion in FmHA to modify agreements, where appropriate.

In Re Marshall

298 B.R. 670 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · Aug 26, 2003

This disclosure was clearly sufficient for the creditors to inquire further if they had any interest. … However, the stock itself was clearly listed in the schedule. The court finds that this disclosure was sufficient.

In Re Montgomery Court Apartments of Ingham County, Ltd.

141 B.R. 324 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · May 26, 1992

Williams’s testimony clearly supports a finding that the accuracy of Montgomery Court’s financial records has improved dramatically. … Clearly, the plan as proposed substantially and negatively modifies the claimant's rights in a manner prohibited by § 1322(b)(2). IV.

SHF Holdings, LLC v. Allamakee County (In Re Agriprocessors, Inc.)

465 B.R. 822 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Iowa · Jan 17, 2012

Abuse of discretion occurs if the district court rests its conclusion on clearly erroneous factual findings or if its decision relies on erroneous legal conclusions. … The Court thus first looks to what SHF must prove to qualify as a good-faith purchaser. The relevant test is twofold: a good faith purchaser is one who buys in good faith and for value.

Davis v. M & M Developer, LLC (In re MBM Entertainment, LLC)

531 B.R. 363 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · May 27, 2015

Transfers to LLCs that Allegedly Were Not Qualified to Do Business in NY Davis alleged in her Complaints that MBM Development, MBM Entertainment and Altria were not qualified to do business in New York State and that the … There must be an express or implied agreement that there shall be a hen on specific, clearly identified property and the intent to establish the lien must be clear. See James v.

In re Westinghouse Elec. Co.

588 B.R. 347 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Aug 1, 2018

"To enter a contract, a party must clearly and unequivocally accept the offeror's terms. … Bowers clearly confirmed it in the email exchanges with Mr.

Fleming v. Sagan (In Re Sagan)

218 B.R. 494 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Missouri · Mar 18, 1998

For example, he researched spousal and family immunity, as well as the standards for contributory negligence. He also researched California law prohibiting an employee truck driver from carrying non-driver passengers. … Sagan that the “Hyatt” case established that proposition. On May 19, 1995, Mr. Fleming memorialized the split negotiated by the parties in March of 1995 by writing out the terms of the arrangement on his letterhead.