Case law

Matthews, Jr. v. Gamboa

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Aug 17, 2020

Clearly this was a § 523(a)(3) case. Section 523(a)(3) makes nondischargeable a creditor’s claim which is “neither listed nor scheduled...if known to the debtor.” … A judge’s ordinary efforts in courtroom administration ... remain immune.”

Gibson v. Gibson

149 B.R. 562 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · Jan 20, 1993

Plaintiff has established the first element of collateral estoppel. 2. Actuality of Litigation of Issues. … Judge Johnston’s findings on Pacesetter’s written financial statements establish a debt nondischargeable under § 523(a)(2)(B); those on Defendant’s oral representations establish one nondischargeable under § 523(a)(2)(A).

Victor P. Kearney

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Mexico · Oct 24, 2019

Pa. 1991) is instructive: we conclude that it is clearly not the function of a court to blindly appoint counsel first, upon request, and then ask questions or cut compensation later. … Thus, the fact that a defendant may be able to muster enough resources, of his own or of a friend or relative, to obtain bail does not in itself establish his nonindigence for the purpose of purchasing a complete

Marcus Lee Associates, L.P. v. Wachovia Bank, N.A. (In Re Marcus Lee Associates, L.P.)

422 B.R. 21 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 23, 2009

Such a motive is clearly not a basis from which to infer the requisite intent of the developer to bestow performance benefits upon the purchasers of the condominium units, let alone their successors ... and explains why, … (PHFA) to provide mortgage payments to their mortgagees through the Commonwealth’s Homeowner’s Emergency Mortgage Assistance Program, for which the debtors had qualified prepetition.

Hilltop SPV, LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · Jan 6, 2025

because the GGA contains covenants that run with the land, the entire agreement is immune from rejection. … The Court agrees with Hilltop and concludes the GGA is executory and not immune from rejection just because it contains covenants running with the land. c.

Todd Armstrong

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · Mar 18, 2024

Keeton, in the nature of support, established or subject to establishment by the Decree or other court order, and not assigned to a nongovernmental entity. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(14A)(A)– (D). … established or subject to establishment by the Decree or other court order. There is no evidence linking this fee to the fees awarded by the state court in the Divorce Action.

In Re Hockenberry

457 B.R. 646 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Sep 16, 2011

Upon doing so, she will qualify for a Social Security retirement benefit. Id. at 34 . Mrs. … This amount clearly is much less than what they would have received in a Chapter 7 liquidation.

In re Woodruff

600 B.R. 616 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 30, 2019

First, despite Wheeler's contentions, the Claim does not clearly assert how Wheeler is owed the full value of the Property as claimed. … The Debtor also argues that Wheeler has failed to establish a value for the Property in excess of the amount provided in the Debtor's Proposed Plan.

Mann Realty Associates, Inc.

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 22, 2019

Clearly, they did not. … First, a party's later position must be “clearly inconsistent” with its earlier position. Id. at 750 (citations omitted).

In re: Diamonds and Diamonds Inc

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico · Apr 16, 2019

Joint and several liability is not presumed and must be expressly established. … Debtor clearly expressed in 12 writing that its unlimited continuing guaranty is joint and several.

Majestic Gardens Condominium C Association Inc

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Mar 15, 2022

A calendaring error by debtor’s counsel may be “excusable neglect” but is excusable neglect a basis for extending the deadline for filing a Subchapter V plan and, if not, does such an error qualify as a circumstance … The plain language of the statute sets “a clearly higher standard” than the “excusable neglect” standard of Rule 9006(b)(1) and requires that the debtor establish that “the delay necessitating the extension

In Re Miller

361 B.R. 224 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama · Jan 18, 2007

The court concluded that the terms of the plan determine whether payments have been scheduled for payment in the future and also establish the classification of creditors on the effective date of the plan. … Section 1325(b)(3) clearly states that the amounts reasonably necessary to be expended for purposes of determining disposable income “shall” be determined under § 707(b)(2)(A) and (B).

Stewart v. Warren

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Mar 4, 2025

Moreover, the statutory definition includes debts: “established or subject to establishment before, on, or after the date of the order for relief in a case under this title, . . . .” §101(14A)(C). … The definitional provision includes debts that are “established or subject to establishment . . . by reason of applicable provisions of – . . . (ii) an order of a court of record; . . . .” §101(14A)(C).

Silverman v. Actrade Capital, Inc. (In Re Actrade Financial Technologies Ltd.)

337 B.R. 791 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jun 23, 2005

did not find that the prior lender whose debt was repaid had acted in good faith, but held that “bad faith does not appear to be an articulable exception to the broad principle that ‘the satisfaction of a preexisting debt qualifies … The Court rejected that argument, stating that § 549 contained no such exception and that “[a]b-sent a clearly expressed legislative intent to the contrary, the language of a statute must ordinarily be regarded as conclusive

In Re Mars

340 B.R. 844 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · Mar 28, 2006

The UST argues that “want of need” can be established through the application of a single objective test: are Mr. and Ms. … This common meaning clearly was not lost on the Sixth Circuit when it decided Krohn .

Samuel D. Sweet, Chapter 7 Trustee for the Estate of Debtors, John Frederick Shastal Jr. and Kimberly Ann Shastal, and John Frederick Shastal, an individual, and Kimberly Ann Shastal, an individual v. Majors Law, PLLC, a Professional Limited Liability Company, Sheena L. Majors, an individual, Desirae Bedford, an individual and Recovery Law Group, a Professional Corporation

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · Nov 6, 2025

Mich., July 10, 2020) (emotional damages qualify as “actual damages” under § 362(h)); In re Weaver, No. 17-32042, 2023 WL 3362064, at *7–8 (Bankr. E.D. … I don't think she's qualified nor prepared to do that.

Rosauer v. Detiege

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Idaho · Jun 24, 2021

Plaintiff could not qualify for the mortgage on her own, and ICCU told James that he may be able to qualify if his credit was better. … No. 18, that established deadlines for the Parties to amend the pleadings.

McKenny v. McGraw (In Re Bell & Beckwith)

104 B.R. 842 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 10, 1989

The McKen-nys attach significance to the fact that, in enacting the 1978 Amendments, Congress omitted the qualifying phrase “as of the filing date”. … This section establishes the priority in which customer property shall be allocated. ...

Schwinn Plan Committee v. Transamerica Insurance Finance Corp. (In Re Schwinn Bicycle Co.)

200 B.R. 980 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Sep 25, 1996

The Schwinn Plan Committee was established pursuant to Article IX of the Plan to perform various tasks involving plan implementation. … All six elements must be established in order to avoid a transfer. Barash v. Public Fin. Corp., 658 F.2d 504 , 507 (7th Cir.1981).

Ohio Farmers Insurance v. Hughes-Bechtol, Inc. (In Re Hughes-Bechtol, Inc.)

117 B.R. 890 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Jun 29, 1990

Postpetition financing orders obtained pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 364 are quite clearly unique and extraordinary orders. … Although the same or similar facts may establish either waiver or estoppel, they are distinct legal doctrines.