Case law

In Re W.R. Grace & Co.

355 B.R. 462 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Dec 14, 2006

The experts on both sides are qualified. … Anderson’s methodology is clearly articulated and is capable of repetition and peer review.

In Re Aerovias Nacionales De Colombia, S.A. Avianca

323 B.R. 879 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · May 6, 2005

See In re Okura, 249 B.R. at 603 stating, “Where the intention of the parties is clearly and unambiguously set forth, effect must be given to the intent as indicated by the language used.” … It contends that this establishes the viability of its claim.

In Re Letterese

397 B.R. 507 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Dec 2, 2008

Section 109 of the Bankruptcy Code provides for who qualifies to be a debtor under Title 11. … A judgment which establishes monetary liability in favor of a party is noncontingent and liquidated as to the sum owed.

In Re Reeves

327 B.R. 436 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Missouri · Jul 15, 2005

Moreover, while Debtor’s testimony establishes what the work plan and childcare arrangements are, it fails to establish that they cannot be otherwise and that they necessarily prevent the Debtor from working overtime. … The fact that the definition looks to the spouse’s income only for joint cases will perhaps permit some individual consumer debtors to qualify for Chapter 7 relief if they do not file jointly with their spouse.” W.

Matter of WT Grant Co.

4 B.R. 53 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Feb 20, 1980

Rodman thereafter qualified as the Trustee of the bankrupt estate and has since acted in that capacity. … Rodman qualified as the trustee in bankruptcy.

Dechert Price & Rhoads v. Direct Satellite Communications, Inc. (In Re Direct Satellite Communications, Inc.)

96 B.R. 507 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 6, 1989

Therefore, clearly, under the principles established in, e.g., Lentino and Storm , expert testimony on the part of the Debtor was required to sustain a cause of action as to all three requisite elements as to each of the … Clearly, there is no expert testimony on this record establishing the link that Dechert’s malpractice was the proximate cause of the Debtor’s loss of Marquee.

Faulkner v. Kornman (In re Heritage Organization L.L.C.)

466 B.R. 862 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Jan 18, 2012

The Trustee clearly abandoned these claims. … Here, the entire record establishes that the claims against FMS were decided.

In Re Bell-Breslin

283 B.R. 834 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maryland · Jun 17, 2002

The bankruptcy schedules clearly differentiate between wearing apparel and jewelry. 10 This is probably because the forms for bankruptcy schedules track the federal exemptions, which are not applicable here. … Proc. §§ ll-504(b) and (f) qualify the items of property and their value that may be claimed exempt by debtors in bankruptcy.

Aiello v. Providian Financial Corp. (In Re Aiello)

231 B.R. 693 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 25, 1999

Therefore, it is clearly a core matter. … Subsections (b)(1) and (b)(2) clearly do not *717 apply to this complaint.

Matter of Hunt's Health Care, Inc.

161 B.R. 971 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 28, 1993

Once the reasonable hourly rate and the number of reasonable hours have been established and the resulting lodestar calculated, the Supreme Court has “established a ‘strong presumption’ that the lodestar represents the ‘reasonable … As a result, a perceived stigma arose that only less qualified counsel in the bankruptcy bar worked for debtors due to the reduced compensation.

Geltzer v. Brizinova (In re Brizinova)

565 B.R. 488 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · Mar 3, 2017

More than that it is the dignity of the process that is at stake here with the Trustee clearly abusing his powers.” Sanctions Opp. at 15. … This nondisclosure requirement does not, of course, immunize information from disclosure that is otherwise required by law or by the litigation process.

In Re Cuisine Magazine, Inc.

61 B.R. 210 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · May 28, 1986

thus feel it would be inherently unfair to impose such limitations (based on an amorphous understanding of the nature of the work Lord was to have performed) on Lord at this juncture, when such a circumscription was not clearly … A bald assertion by Lord that the billing of staff overtime is its “standard practice,” see Response of Lord ¶ 9, hardly qualifies as adequate documentation.

In Re Peters

91 B.R. 401 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · Sep 20, 1988

Article 1, § 8, cl. 4 of the United States Constitution requires Congress to establish uniform laws on the subject of Bankruptcy. … Departure from the law of the case established from an earlier decision such as Fernandez, requires a compelling reason.

In re Great Lakes Comnet, Inc.

569 B.R. 693 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · Jun 2, 2017

As the Liquidation Trustee highlights, the first sentence of subsection 39(ix) begins with a phrase establishing a condition precedent. … Yet any such qualifier (e.g., other than any claim secured by the non-acquired assets) is conspicuously absent from subsection 39(ix) or any other provision of the Settlement Agreement.

Great Bay Power Corp. v. Town of Seabrook (In Re EUA Power Corp.)

184 B.R. 631 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Hampshire · Apr 26, 1995

If Congress intended to significantly extend the bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction to include the redetermination of paid taxes by preempting the state law time limitations, as the plaintiff suggests, it would have more clearly … To understand this holding it is important to realize that the very issue presented in the case was when the 60 day time limit to request a refund began to run, because that determination established whether the debtor timely

In Re Intercat, Inc.

247 B.R. 911 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia · Feb 18, 2000

What was established, however, is that (1) in April 1997 Mr. … Herman is uniquely qualified to oversee the operation of what is a complex product and distribution facility.

McMillen v. Kadis (In re McMillen)

390 B.R. 1 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · May 7, 2008

Kadis’s promise of an additional $75,000 and of a mortgage to secure it certainly qualifies as “other good and •valuable consideration” received. … Although McMillen did indeed breach his obligation to pay rent, I find that Kadis has failed to establish that McMillen made the promise to pay rent without intent to honor that promise.

In re Johns-Manville Corp.

552 B.R. 221 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jun 30, 2016

In other words, the debtor’s liability is not yet established. … This definition clearly includes MFP.

In re White

482 B.R. 905 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Arkansas · Nov 6, 2012

as a priority claim under § 507(a)(8) and thus would not qualify for treatment as a prepetition claim under § 501(i).” … Having obtained an extension, the debtors filed their return and established a taxable amount in October, 2007.

In Re Exide Technologies

340 B.R. 222 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Apr 3, 2006

Clearly, EnerSys exhibit 253 is admissible under Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(A), since it is being offered against Exide and is a statement made by Exide (in its representative capacity, of course). … I concluded already that Exide exhibits 155-157 qualify as business records. 33 .