Case law

Wu v. Rhee (In re Rhee)

481 B.R. 880 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · Oct 19, 2012

This was clearly not the Wus’ position. … Even if he had not, Texas law clearly imposes fiduciary duties on real estate agents and brokers. 22 Tex. Admin.

In re Fairmont General Hospital, Inc.

569 B.R. 421 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. West Virginia · Mar 24, 2017

Therefore, at the time the Debtor discharged Marquardt, it was clearly prepared to live with the risks associated with a potential termination claim. … Because Marquardt’s termination arose post-petition, his severance claim does not qualify because it did not occur within 180 days before the filing of the petition. See In re M Group, Inc., 268 B.R. 896 (Bankr. D.

Krudy v. Simpson (In re Simpson)

474 B.R. 656 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Jul 2, 2012

Simpson’s participation seems clearly to have been an accommodation to Simpson Farms’ voracious appetite for money. … Her pension benefits could not have serviced half the loan, and the Simpsons were clearly unaware of the specter of contribution doctrine until the Trustee filed this suit.

Riley v. Decoulos (In Re American Bridge Products, Inc.)

328 B.R. 274 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 29, 2005

Corp., 547 F.2d at 3 (“a receiver who faithfully and carefully carries out the orders of his appointing judge must share the judge’s absolute immunity”), Decoulos *328 asserts, as a consequence, that he is immune from suit … The Court then engaged in the following discussion, clearly identifying the receivership as separate from the receiver personally.

In Re Mirant Corp.

314 B.R. 347 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Sep 1, 2004

MNG was clearly a “Counterparty.” It reasonably relied on the Interim Order. … Once an entity qualifies for an exception to the stay, the court must ensure that entity receives the benefits Congress intended.

Frank and Emma Persyn Family Limited Partnership v. Chicago Title of Texas LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · Apr 25, 2024

[ECF No. 62, Ex. 37 at 35] (“The limited-services exception to the qualified intermediary safe harbor allows an attorney to be a qualified intermediary.”) … The Court agrees with Defendant that it is beyond dispute that Debtor’s actions were clearly wrongful.

Randall v. Bank One National Ass'n (In Re Randall)

358 B.R. 145 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 1, 2006

Pennsylvania rules of procedure establish a discrete category of civil actions in mortgage foreclosure. … Bank One’s motion did not *172 clearly raise the issue and so the plaintiff did not address it in her responsive memorandum.

Duval v. Portner (In Re Portner)

109 B.R. 977 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Nov 11, 1989

In order to grant that relief, the Bankruptcy court must determine whether the debtor qualifies for the relief, and the relief should not be granted if it has been shown to the satisfaction of the court that there are reasonable … Although not the paradigm of spendthrift draftsmanship, we hold that this provision is clearly a spendthrift clause. As such, Debtor’s interest in the Trust is not property of estate.

In Re ANC Rental Corp., Inc.

278 B.R. 714 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · May 23, 2002

If they do, Hertz and Avis will clearly have standing to be heard on those Motions. … Even under that test, though, the Concession Agreements are clearly not personal contracts.

In re Thomas

596 B.R. 350 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Tennessee · Jan 18, 2019

October 28, 2013) (dismissing the case and holding that TDOT is a state agency entitled to sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment). However, while the First Federal Suit was on appeal, Mr. … Moreover, this severe acrimony has been carried over into this Chapter 11 case clearly impeding its success. Compare FED. R. BANKR.

Murphy v. Nunes (In Re Terrific Seafoods, Inc.)

197 B.R. 724 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jul 2, 1996

Moreover, this course of conduct is clearly deliberate_” Id. at 999-1000 . DiSandro lied quite deliberately. … First, I find that the trustee did not establish Terrific’s insolvency.

In re Vodenos

553 B.R. 786 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. California · Jul 12, 2016

Thus, to qualify as willful misconduct, the Court must find that Herrera and Ziv intentionally acted while knowing that their action(s) would probably result in damage to Vodenos. … Plaintiff has clearly not met his burden in spite of the recently filed opposition to the motion.

Achterberg v. Creditors Trade Ass'n (In re Achterberg)

573 B.R. 819 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California · Feb 3, 2017

IRS (In re Jove Eng’g), 92 F.3d 1539, 1546 (11th Cir. 1996), there can be no doubt that the automatic stay qualifies as a specific and definite court order. … Punitive Damages The evidence establishes that Defendant intentionally acted with recklessness (at least in 2009 through April 2015) and intentionally and in callous disregard (clearly for May 2015 into August 2015) of the

Tomlinson v. Clem (In re Clem)

583 B.R. 329 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Dec 21, 2017

This was quite clearly an entireties clause. … Clearly, this amounted to a breach of the Contract.

Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Travellers International AG. (In Re Trans World Airlines, Inc.)

180 B.R. 389 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Nov 30, 1994

This is clearly what the court was saying in Rutland County Nat. Bank, supra. The only point I find clearly established by these cases is that fair valuation does not imply a foreclosure, auction or distress sale. … It is clearly not a saleable “asset” and it has no market value.

International Fidelity Insurance v. Marques (In Re Marques)

358 B.R. 188 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 30, 2006

The Prefatory Language clearly establishes a condition precedent, (ie., “if any of the Bonds are executed in connection with a contract which by its terms prohibits the assignment of the contract price”) to the parties’ agreement … He makes the same claim about the City of Wilmington which has the same qualified prohibition in its Standard Specifications for Construction.

Keeler v. PRA Receivables Management, LLC (In Re Keeler)

440 B.R. 354 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · May 4, 2009

Moreover, “[t]he aforementioned proof of claim was/were clearly outside of the applicable statute of limitations, and were therefore legally unenforceable claims.” Id., ¶ 15. … Otherwise, § 108(c)(1) preserves the statute of limitations established under nonbankruptcy law.”).

In Re Siegel

214 B.R. 329 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Tennessee · Oct 24, 1997

The court reasoned as follows: It was clearly the intention of Congress that a bankrupt be permitted to make a fresh start after bankruptcy by the use of the tools or implements necessary to enable him to pursue and make … In Carson , the bankruptcy court held that computer equipment owned by a debtor-lawyer qualified for the Oklahoma tools of the trade exemption.

Victoria Alloys, Inc. v. Fortis Bank SA/NV (In Re Victoria Alloys, Inc.)

261 B.R. 424 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Apr 10, 2001

The scope of § 541 is very broad and establishes a bankruptcy estate upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition. … As determined above, the Debtor never acquired the qualifying type of interest contemplated for prosecution under § 548. As such, the remaining elements under § 548 do not warrant further addressment by the Court.

In Re IBIS Corp.

272 B.R. 883 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Oct 5, 2001

Neither cashing the distribution check nor maintaining a current address is necessary to establish eligibility to participate in the distribution under the plan. … Clearly, the creditors to whom those distributions were mailed have done everything required to be eligible for participation in distributions under the plan.