Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersFB

7,439 results

1.69s

  • In Re Klus

    173 B.R. 51 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · Oct 13, 1994

    On August 7,1992, an order (the “506(a) Order”) entered establishing the facts agreed to in the Stipulation. … The first prong of Chevron Oil is satisfied because Nobelman decided an issue of first impression with the Court, the resolution of which was not "clearly foreshadowed.” 404 U.S. at 106 , 92 S.Ct. at 355 .

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Coleman v. Community Trust Bank (In Re Coleman)

    285 B.R. 892 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Virginia · Sep 17, 2002

    In Tennessee, as in Virginia, it is necessary to avoid a fraudulent conveyance to establish that the grantee was apprised of the grantor’s wrongful intent. … Belcher, was aware that one of the motivating reasons that caused the Colemans to offer the deeds of trust upon their valuable, unencumbered real property was to protect the same from IRS levy, it does not qualify as a bona

    Cited 5 timesPublished
  • Boyd v. Dock's Corner Associates (In Re Great Northern Forest Products, Inc.)

    135 B.R. 46 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · Dec 20, 1991

    The moving party bears the burden of clearly establishing the non-existence of any genuine issue of fact material to a judgment in his favor. Adickes v. S.H. … To allow the Trustee to store the property at no cost is clearly a windfall to the estate.

    Cited 41 timesPublished
  • White-Lett v. The Bank of New York Mellon, Corp.

    United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · Oct 3, 2022

    Plaintiff further argues that BANA cannot establish a default without first presenting the note, authenticating it, establishing BANA’s right to enforce it, and establishing Plaintiff’s failure to pay. … Therefore, the Court cannot conclude that BANA has established the second element of the safe harbor defense.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Feshbach v. United States Department of Treasury (In re Feshbach)

    576 B.R. 660 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Oct 17, 2017

    True, if the Service (or even one revenue officer) approved the Feshbachs excessive spending, the Service would be hard-pressed to later persuade a bankruptcy court that such spending qualifies as an attempt to evade or defeat … Although the Fesh-bachs are clearly above-median debtors, they were not subject to the means test because their debts were not primarily consumer debts. .

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • Zachary Ober and Jennifer Ober

    United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 8, 2020

    Stat. § 33-1104(A)(3) as of the petition date, it qualifies for the Arizona Homestead Exemption set forth in Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 33-1101(A). … See also Calderon, 507 B.R. at 730 (“Once Calderon’s homestead was established by operation of law, the controlling question shifted from whether Calderon established a homestead in the residence to whether he abandoned

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • SS Body Armor I, Inc

    United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Jun 7, 2021

    It does nothing more than provide some certainty for a particular liquidating trust that it qualifies as a grantor trust, i.e., qualifies for tax treatment advantageous to its beneficiaries. … Thus, establishing an I.R.C. § 301.7701–4(d) liquidating trust maximizes the value of distributions.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • In Re International Banking Corp. B.S.C.

    439 B.R. 614 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Nov 23, 2010

    An attempt to draft such a definition (and to establish criteria according to which a particular category of creditors might receive special treatment) would not only show the difficulty of crafting such a definition but … Their secured status does not, however, immunize their liens from attack under Bahraini law any more than it would under United States law.

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • In Re Williams

    253 B.R. 220 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Tennessee · Jul 27, 2000

    Clearly all of these debtors realized at the time they filed their petitions that they owed money on student loans. … Clearly plans could be proposed by Ms.

    Cited 28 timesPublished
  • Lunn v. Lunn

    United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Illinois · Jun 21, 2022

    This common ownership interest remained until the entry of the August 16, 2019 judgment establishing the parties’ property interests—the same judgment which simultaneously created the judicial lien securing the Defendant … Hence, the Debtor did not possess a pre-existing interest to which the lien could fix, and, therefore, the Defendant’s lien is immune to the Debtor’s challenge under § 522(f)(1). 4 Section 5/503(e

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • In re Cripps

    549 B.R. 836 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · May 13, 2016

    The Applicant overlooks the implicit deadline established by various sections of Chapter 13. … Because the definition of “claim” does not include a pre or post-petition qualifier, it includes priority claims, including administrative expenses.

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • Jones v. Tauber & Balser, P.C.

    503 B.R. 162 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · Jul 5, 2013

    The work product privilege provides a qualified immunity for materials prepared in anticipation of litigation by a party, an attorney, or other representatives of the party. Hickman v. … In Plaintiff's Omnibus Motion, he fails to clearly argue why the crime-fraud exception should apply at all.

    Cited 6 timesPublished
  • Walsh v. United States (In Re Walsh)

    260 B.R. 142 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · Mar 29, 2001

    The Debtor relies on the “plain meaning” analysis applied by the Supreme Court in much of its bankruptcy jurisprudence for more than a decade. 5 His argument is that, with the statute as bare of qualifying language as it … When it is applied to the established facts here, the result is clear.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • Michael Anthony Hudson and Kelly Nicole Hudson

    United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Nebraska · Feb 7, 2024

    While LB 964 clearly expanded the persons entitled to claim the exemption to include individuals, the issue is whether it allows a married couple to separately claim two exemptions in one parcel of property. … Truly, they work just as hard as those who qualify for the exemption. They have dreams of owning and keeping a home, just as those who currently qualify.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Heritage Equities, LLC v. Newman (In re Newman)

    588 B.R. 281 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Connecticut · Aug 3, 2018

    Kawaauhau further rejected the notion that a debt arising from a mere "knowing breach of contract," absent more, would qualify as "willful" under the statute. Kawaauhau , 523 U.S. at 61-62 , 118 S.Ct. 974 . … The parties clearly anticipated that there might be - or perhaps likely would be - times when a given real estate transaction did not close, or that Heritage would not be paid as anticipated. See, Pl. Ex. 102, ¶ 2.

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Patricia Bell Muhammad

    United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. North Carolina · Mar 19, 2026

    Its provisions, including those NCDMV enforced against the Debtor in this instance, clearly reflect North Carolina’s concern for safety and public welfare. Therefore, NCDMV’s enforcement of N.C. Gen. … The Debtor does not dispute, and it is plain to the Court, that NCDMV qualifies as a governmental unit under § 362(b)(4). 11 U.S.C. § 101(27).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Manville Corp. v. Equity Security Holders Committee (In Re Johns-Manville Corp.)

    66 B.R. 517 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Oct 28, 1986

    The evidence adduced at that hearing, relied upon herein, clearly established the serious threat and real jeopardy that will be posed to this reorganization if the shareholders are permitted to call for that meeting. 1. … by the Second Circuit has been established.

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • In Re Morris

    155 B.R. 422 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · Jun 7, 1993

    The gambling debts under consideration in this case would not qualify for administrative expense treatment under section 503(b). … Clearly, the primary motive behind the first conversion was to somehow obtain discharge of the post-petition gambling debts.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • Grossman v. Garabedian (In re Garabedian)

    520 B.R. 326 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 7, 2014

    Accordingly, the Debtor did not clearly set forth in either his testimony or his Schedules how much money he was paying business creditors and business lenders and how much he contributed to household expenses. … Although the Debtor in responses to the Trustee’s Requests for Admissions, denied or improperly qualified his answers to the Trustee’s Requests, the Trustee through the Debtor’s admissions at trial established that the Debtor

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • I.U.P.A.T. District Council No. 57 Combined Funds v. Roetter

    United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 6, 2021

    Union and Industry Pension Fund, which was established under an Agreement and declaration of trust dated April 1, 1967. … One may qualify as a fiduciary under non-bankruptcy law without so qualifying under §523(a)(4)”); In re Masdea, 307 B.R. 466 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2004) (same).

    Cited 0 timesUnknown

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.