Case law

Buckland v. Household Realty Corp. (In Re Buckland)

123 B.R. 573 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Jan 14, 1991

Although this citation may seem unnecessarily elementary, it clearly establishes that the provisions of 11 U.S.C. § 506 are applicable in chapter 7 proceedings. … He is an approved appraiser for the Montgomery County Common Pleas Probate Court and the Montgomery County Sheriff’s Office, and has previously qualified as an expert witness in the Montgomery County Common Pleas Court, the

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.

Fairfield Sentry Limited (In Liquidation) v. HSBC Securities Services (Luxembourg) SA

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jan 29, 2024

The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act provides that “a foreign state shall be immune from the jurisdiction of the courts of the United States and of the States except as provided in sections 1605 to 1607 of this chapter. … PIFSS is not clearly applicable to this situation, and Defendant’s proffered case law does not convince the Court otherwise.

Dobin v. Hill (In Re Hill)

342 B.R. 183 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · May 9, 2006

As one court noted, “the fact that a transfer occurs in the context of a divorce proceeding does not immunize such transfer from a § 548 attack by a trustee in bankruptcy for one of the marital partners.” … The second requirement to establishing a § 548(c) defense is for the transferee to prove an exchange for value.

North Bay General Hospital, Inc. v. McNaull (In Re North Bay General Hospital, Inc.)

404 B.R. 429 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 18, 2009

The First Circuit, in Gitto, held that “[t]o qualify for protection under the § 107(b)(2) exception for defamatory material, an interested party must show (1) the material at issue would alter his reputation in the eyes of … Arent Fox did not establish that the Pleadings are “scandalous and defamatory” pursuant to § 107(b)(2).

Freelife International, LLC v. Butler (In Re Butler)

377 B.R. 895 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Utah · Jul 19, 2006

Holli herself testified that she had nothing to do with Prosperous Partners after its putative sale to GotXango.com, which clearly qualifies as a “transfer” under § 727(a)(2)(A). … The alleged disposition of Prosperous Partners combined with the retention of a secret interest in the property would also qualify the Prosperous Partners sale as a prohibited act under § 727(a)(2)(A).

In Re Dexterity Surgical, Inc.

365 B.R. 690 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · Mar 15, 2007

SVI must plead facts establishing a direct claim. The Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint was admitted as an exhibit at the hearing on November 15, 2006. … To establish a prima facia case, “the alleged act of interference must be performed in furtherance of defendant’s personal interests.” Id.

In Re Johnson

300 B.R. 471 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · Oct 10, 2003

The coincident meaning of statutory identifiers is enough to establish Dulas and Sunde as corollary authority for the dispute at bar. … The Eighth Circuit clearly recognized that a tortfeasor’s performance on the settlement of a personal injury claim creates an asset for the claimant that is distinct from the one identified in Subd. 22.

Zimmerman v. Frem Corp. (In Re Kenval Marketing Corp.)

69 B.R. 922 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 11, 1987

. § 544 (b)) and if he can establish the other elements necessary under the state statute, he can avoid the debtor’s transfers to the defendant. … I believe that if Congress intended such a result, it would have expressed itself more clearly. See Midatlantic National Bank v.

In Re Kuhn

322 B.R. 377 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 23, 2005

The Carlson trustee failed to establish that the medical bills in question were joint obligations of the debtor and the non-debt- or spouse. … The record in this case fails to establish “bad faith” under these criteria.

Patrick Dewire Hottinger

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. West Virginia · May 3, 2023

A professional’s asserted travel time, however, may qualify as productive. … If, for example, “the professional establishes that he or she utilized that time productively by preparing for a meeting or court proceeding in the case, [then] compensation may be awarded at a higher percentage.”

James F. Humphreys & Associates, L.C. v. Horne (In re James F. Humphreys & Associates, L.C.)

558 B.R. 758 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. West Virginia · Sep 26, 2016

The complaint need not “forecast evidence sufficient to prove the elements of [a] claim,” but it must “allege sufficient facts to establish those elements.” Wright v. N. … Conn. 1983), noting also that the cited decision observed under such circumstances “the automatic stay would clearly not extend to such non debt- or.”).

Esther Elizabeth Collins

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Georgia · Dec 20, 2022

Movant argues that his judgment against Debtor qualifies as a nondischargeable domestic support obligation (Doc. 37). … The Court finds Movant’s claim fails to qualify as a domestic support obligation. III.

Harmon v. Lighthouse Capital Funding, Inc. (In Re Harmon)

444 B.R. 696 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · Feb 17, 2011

However, items that are reasonable — but *708 not necessary — do not qualify under § 50(e)(2). … Thus, the fees clearly exceed 8% of the total loan amount. 20 .

Davis v. Cox (In Re Cox)

274 B.R. 13 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Maine · Feb 22, 2002

The IRA’s Cox clearly has standing to contest disposition of the two individual retirement accounts. See, e.g., Owen v. … As shown below, the “choice” is wedded, indeed welded, to established state and federal legal principles.

Gibbons v. Haddad (In Re Haddad)

68 B.R. 944 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 16, 1987

It summarized Marathon in this fashion: “The court’s holding in that case establishes only that Congress may not vest in a non-Article III court the power to adjudicate, render final judgment, and issue binding orders in … Our conclusion is reinforced when the other clearly constitutional powers of the bankruptcy court are compared with the purpose and effect of civil contempt powers.

Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. RG Financial, Ltd. (In Re Powerburst Corp.)

154 B.R. 307 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California · Apr 16, 1993

Regarding the Perle Trust, the Subscription Agreement required that to qualify as an investor, each equity owner of the trust must have been an “Accredited Investor”. … Clearly, these documents were drafted to avoid the possibility of such defenses. Additionally, regarding New York contacts, payment or performance under the notes was required in New York.

Patrick Dewire Hottinger

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. West Virginia · Jul 20, 2023

A professional’s asserted travel time, however, may qualify as productive. … The authority established in Merry-Go-Round does not compel the court to reconsider its reduction under § 330 in compensation for travel.

Robbins v. Comerica Bank-Detroit (In Re Zwagerman)

115 B.R. 540 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · Jun 19, 1990

debtor are immune from the claims of general creditors so long as the funds can be traced. … A successor trustee filed a bill against the bank to establish a trust in funds set off by the bank.

In Re I.D. Craig Service Corp.

138 B.R. 490 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 31, 1992

These examples are contrary to and distinguishable from Sports, Inc.’s position in the instant case and clearly illustrate the policy of Sports, Inc. to effect transfers routinely and automatically. 17 The Handbook itself … Sports, Inc.’s offer to Trustee to purchase season tickets was not a qualified or limited offer.