Case law

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.

In re Joan Fabrics Corp.

508 B.R. 881 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · May 5, 2014

Under this scheme, the tax rate *889 cannot be established until the tax base is known. See Spiers v. Davenport, 263 N.C. 56 , 138 S.E.2d 762, 764 (1964). … 59 , and deemed state tax liens superior to local ad valorem tax liens. 60 Since the statute provided priority to state tax liens over “duly recorded liens,” the case can be construed to imply that local ad valorem taxes qualify

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

Richardson v. Checker Acquisition Corp. (In re Checker Motors Corp.)

463 B.R. 858 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · Jan 12, 2012

standard was limited to antitrust cases, the Court reiterated the new pleading standard two years later in a case involving an assertion of deprivation of constitutional rights by government officials who relied on the qualified … immunity privilege.

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.

Rowe v. Conners (In Re Rowe)

110 B.R. 712 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 8, 1990

We therefore conclude that the Debtor's receipt of $200 from her son is an acceptable source of “stable and regular” income to qualify the Debtor for Chapter 13 relief. … As the Defendant notes, 11 U.S.C. § 1322 (b)(5), relating to obligations which mature after the plan payments are completed, is clearly inapplicable.

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.

In Re Angobaldo

160 B.R. 140 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California · Sep 13, 1993

He was certain that qualified individuals were available, although he had not tried to locate anyone to run AMF. … He may have been able to establish eligibility for Chapter 13 and received the many benefits available under that chapter while continuing to operate his business.

Barnard v. Joffe (In Re Inflight Newspapers, Inc.)

423 B.R. 6 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · Jan 6, 2010

Kenneth Barnard, Esq. was appointed and duly qualified as Chapter 7 Trustee of the Debtor’s estate. … This is clearly prejudicial to the Trustee. See 2730 Highway 31, 909 F.Supp. at 1457 .

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Toy King Distributors, Inc. v. Liberty Savings Bank, FSB (In Re Toy King Distributors, Inc.)

256 B.R. 1 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 9, 2000

The evidence in this case clearly establishes that multiple badges of fraud are present in every transfer under attack as a fraudulent transfer. ii. Transfers to insiders. … This was clearly a breach of the confirmed plan.

Anderson v. Chainani (In Re Kemper)

263 B.R. 773 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Texas · Jun 12, 2001

This case is based upon the construction of promissory notes which clearly qualify as negotiable instruments under § 3.104(a) of the Texas version of the Uniform Commercial Code. 4 *779 Therefore, the choice of law rules … Interest rate ceilings in excess of 10% per year are, in fact, established in Chapter 303 of the Texas Finance Code.

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.

Armstrong v. Nationwide Mortgage Plan/Trust (In Re Armstrong)

288 B.R. 404 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 24, 2003

The Court therefore concludes that Nationwide qualifies as a good faith assignee entitled to the protections of TILA § 1641. … However, because a violation of HIFA qualifies as an unfair method of competition under UDAP, 21 the Court may look to UDAP for a remedy.

Mitchell v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re Mitchell)

476 B.R. 33 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 20, 2012

set forth by the First Circuit in Rodriguez, 57 F.3d at 1172 , Wells Fargo cannot be exposed to each and every sundry argument set forth by the Mitchells in their pleadings and can only be subjected to claims which are clearly … I find that Wells Fargo lacked sufficient opportunity to respond to this claim when it was not set forth clearly in the Mitchells’ complaint and was raised only superficially by them on the last page of their Rule 56(d) motion

Rutledge v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re Rutledge)

510 B.R. 491 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. North Carolina · May 16, 2014

The definition of *509 “unfair” for purposes of § 75-1.1 has been established for many years. … The Wells Fargo mortgage qualifies as a debt for the purposes of N.C. GemStat. § 75-50(2). As a mortgage servicer or lender seeking to collect on a debt, Wells Fargo qualifies as a debt collector pursuant to N.C.

In re Walter Energy, Inc.

542 B.R. 859 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama · Dec 28, 2015

The Stalking Horse APA is subject to higher or better offers and an open auction at which other qualified bidders may seek to purchase the Alabama Coal Operations and other assets on higher or better terms. 13. … The UMWA labor issues are clearly not the only party or problems being addressed, all simultaneously. 73 61.In sum, the Objectors ignore the express language of the Final Proposal, which clearly invites further discussion

National City Bank v. Manning (In Re Manning)

280 B.R. 171 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Mar 28, 2002

But, elsewhere in the Code, where Congress intended to define the term “cash” broadly (as including more than currency), that intention is clearly expressed. … Alone, financial inability to repay does not establish fraudulent intent.”).

In Re Dennis

230 B.R. 244 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 23, 1999

With that exception, however, which is only applicable in chapter 9 and chapter 11 cases, the Code clearly requires a proof of claim to be filed for a claim to be allowed. … Chrysler, therefore, does not qualify as a party in interest and thus has no standing to object to confirmation of the debtor’s plan on the grounds which it has asserted.

Joseph F Langston, Jr

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 7, 2023

The Debtor’s IRAs were established in a somewhat atypical structure—at least atypical from what this court has seen over the years. … The court held (and the debtor in Yerian did not contest) that such actions were clearly prohibited transactions under the Internal Revenue Code. The debtor nonetheless claimed his IRA exemption was not affected.