Case law

Heritage Organization, L.L.C. v. Canada (In Re Heritage Organization, L.L.C.)

322 B.R. 285 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Mar 8, 2005

The error must have been obvious and capable of being readily and instantly perceived by the average person qualified to serve as an arbitrator. … This record establishes that Heritage, in its motion to dismiss, contended that the parties made no oral agreements.

In Re Chabot

411 B.R. 685 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Montana · Apr 13, 2009

Theresa testified that she located Norling through her own contacts, and that Norling wanted to establish a low income housing program. … The Court finds the second Leavitt factor clearly weighs in favor of a finding of bad faith. The third Leavitt factor is whether the debtor intended to defeat state court litigation.

Hostmann v. First Interstate Bank of Oregon, N.A. (In Re XTI Xonix Technologies, Inc.)

156 B.R. 821 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · Jul 19, 1993

It is based on general principles of justice and does not spring from contract although it may be confirmed or qualified by contract. … The Fastrans parties did not dispute that this language clearly and unambiguously waived all rights the guarantor, upon payment, had against any party.

Cohen Ex Rel. Friedman's Creditor Trust v. Ernst & Young, LLP (In Re Friedman's, Inc.)

372 B.R. 530 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia · May 24, 2007

There is no basis for finding that of all the federal statutes, the Bankruptcy Code alone stands immune from the Federal Arbitration Act. … Citation of the Code, however, does not conclusively establish that the claims are in fact creditor claims derived from the Code. See Trefny v. Bear Stearns Sec.

In Re Hinckley

256 B.R. 814 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 16, 2000

He clearly felt qualified to prepare the family’s tax returns, to make his own determination about the taxable nature of his pension income, and to propound his theory to the IRS. 70 He also made it very clear to his wife … Addressing a history of physical abuse in its facts, the Kistner Court reversed a Tax Court ruling that the spouse did not qualify for innocent spouse relief.

In Re Casper

153 B.R. 544 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Feb 25, 1993

The plan, however, qualifies the distribution among creditors: 100% to secured creditors outside the plan and 10% to unsecured creditors through the plan. … Requiring the Debtors to satisfy 80% of their unsecured debt by committing all of their disposable income over 60 months fails to establish how the Debtors have been harmed.

Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians v. Chivers (In Re Chivers)

275 B.R. 606 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Utah · Apr 9, 2002

For each of the nonmov-ants to avoid summary judgment, they must establish an inference of the presence of each element essential to the case. Id. … Although Chivers clearly contests the element of justifiable reliance, there is some ambiguity in Chivers’ pleadings as to the extent to which he contests the other elements of § 523(a)(2)(A).

Schnelling v. Crawford (In Re James River Coal Co.)

360 B.R. 139 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Feb 8, 2007

The proper inquiry for this Court is to determine whether any of the affirmative defenses asserted by the defendants clearly appear upon the face of the Amended Complaint. … This immunity of stockholders is a basic provision of statutory and common law and it supports a vital economic policy underlying the whole corporate concept.” Cheatle v.

In Re First American Health Care of Georgia, Inc.

212 B.R. 408 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia · Aug 4, 1997

Subsequent to Norman , however, the Supreme Court has held that enhancement for contingency [of outcome] is not permitted under fee-shifting statutes which provide for payment of a reasonable fee to a prevailing party. 5 Clearly … In Morris Plan, base fees were approximately $450,000 and a ten percent enhancement was allowed to uniquely qualified bankruptcy counsel in a $150 million case which ended up paying one hundred cents on the dollar.

Honeywell International, Inc. v. North American Refractories Asbestos Personal Injury Settlement Trust (In re North American Refractories Co.)

542 B.R. 350 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 16, 2015

How then does Honeywell propose that it has established the existence of irreparable harm? … The Court thus finds that Honeywell has clearly failed to establish that a denial of preliminary relief would lead to the sort of irreparable harm that is necessary in order to support the issuance of a preliminary injunction

Nof v. Gannon (In Re Gannon)

173 B.R. 313 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Oct 19, 1994

Discussion Under § 727 of the Code, an individual debtor is entitled to a discharge unless one of the ten enumerated exceptions to discharge specified in § 727(a) is established. … Notwithstanding Gannon and Nassani’s relationship, Nof did not object to Nassani being qualified as an expert with respect to the operation of the wholesale diamond business in New York City. See Trans, at p. 91.

In Re Mikkelsen Farms, Inc.

74 B.R. 280 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · May 19, 1987

The structure of § 101(17) clearly anticipates the court to make a thorough examination, from several perspectives, of the eligibility of a debtor under Chapter 12. … Marks standing Chapter 12 trustee for Oregon and established his compensation.

In Re J & S Conveyors, Inc.

409 B.R. 635 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. New York · Aug 11, 2009

never serve as a substitute for the explicit requirement of Section 521(a)(l)(B)(I) that the Debtor file a schedule of assets, since an interest in an insurance policy such as the Debt- or’s Keyman insurance policies is clearly … The Court reaffirms its oral ruling that the Cash Collateral Stipulation did not qualify as an informal proof of claim because it failed to evidence the intent of NBG to hold the Debtor liable for the debt as required by

Thandeka-Akua Yaa Asantewa Taharaka

United States Bankruptcy Court, District of Columbia · Jan 8, 2020

to cure an alleged 1 In the Order Denying Motion Docketed as Docket No. 75, the court did not specifically dismiss the debtor’s objection to CitiMortgage’s claim, but was clearly … No. 81) does not qualify as an affidavit because it was not signed, dated, and taken under oath. The debtor is incorrect: the document was signed and dated.

In Re Koreag, Controle Et Revision S.A.

130 B.R. 705 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Aug 26, 1991

Mebco is not qualified or authorized to do business in the State of New York. … Clearly, the Petitioner is a foreign representative falling within the scope of this definition.

Brandt v. Carlson (In Re Carlson)

231 B.R. 640 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 10, 1999

Evidence clearly established that the Debtor failed to keep or preserve sufficient documents and recorded information from which his financial condition or business transactions might be ascertained. 33. … Rather, it was established that he thereby paid past due obligations to Loraine.

Roeder v. Lockwood (In Re Lockwood Auto Group, Inc.)

428 B.R. 629 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 14, 2010

This Court also finds Northern Merchandise to be clearly distinguishable and not the blanket “blessing” of this type of transaction as suggested by FNB. … It must be noted that the definition of "instrument” begins with the qualifying word "negotiable”.

In Re Village at Oakwell Farms, Ltd.

428 B.R. 372 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · Apr 19, 2010

The court there concluded that the lawsuit yet to be initiated under New Hampshire law fit the bill as an action to be commenced, and so qualified for the two year extension of time under section 108(a). … It is a trial de novo and the trial court "may not admit in evidence the fact of prior action by the appraisal review board ... except to the extent necessary to establish its jurisdiction.”

Morris Black & Sons, Inc. v. 23S23 Construction, Inc. (In Re Carriage House Condominiums L.P.)

415 B.R. 133 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 30, 2009

Indeed, it is “justified only in the exceptional circumstances where resort to state proceedings clearly serves an *144 important countervailing interest.” Muir, supra at 360-861 . … Thus, all five of the elements must be established before a court may abstain from hearing the removed case matters here.

Timothy Bagley

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Rhode Island · Oct 29, 2025

Grady clearly intended to seek priority treatment of her claim. was not feasible because Mr. Bagley’s disposable income was insufficient to meet the proposed plan payments. … Indeed, the DSO Order was narrowly tailored to avoid a potential stay violation and clearly stayed the enforcement of the order during the bankruptcy case. VI.