Case law

In re Lunden

524 B.R. 410 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 15, 2015

He argues that the Financial Statement qualifies as an “official record of a state court proceeding,” and is thus exempt from the redaction requirement under Rule 9037(b)(3). … The redaction requirements are not only clearly stated in the Rule itself, but are repeatedly emphasized throughout the electronic filing process.

McGann

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Mar 18, 2026

By requiring no more than a statement of the claim, Rule 8 establishes “implicitly, but with unmistakable clarity,” [Hanna v. … Berk clearly instructs that under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the issue of whether the Debtor can meet her burden of proof is not one that the Court can evaluate at an early, pre-discovery stage of the case.

Glen Meadow Holdings, LLC v. Storm

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · Mar 27, 2024

Kan. 1982) (“Here there clearly was no express trust agreement. … Ill. 1982) (“This court interprets the qualifying terms ‘fiduciary duty’ to require proof of a technical trust between the agent and principal, before a debt due and owing between them can be found non-dischargeable.”)

Tera Res. Co., Ltd. v. Lee (In re Cuzco Dev. U.S.A., LLC)

592 B.R. 352 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Hawaii · Aug 27, 2018

If Tera prevails and establishes that it holds administrative claims, those claims must, under the confirmed plan, be paid in full. … Second, they claim that "the facts pled in the Complaint and Tera's actions in the bankruptcy case and this adversary proceeding clearly show that [Tera] did not rely on any of the misrepresentations alleged in the Complaint

Genever Holdings LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 1, 2021

selection of a Qualified Buyer and Qualified Offer, and successful and backup offers for the sale of the Residence, subject to Bankruptcy Court approval with right of objection by Bravo Luck and PAX. … The Engagement Letter also clearly limits Ms.

White v. White (In re White)

568 B.R. 894 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · Mar 20, 2017

Under this broad definition of transfer, even a disposition of possession, custody or control could qualify as a transfer. … Some of the deposits state clearly they are from a savings account, but there is no evidence of the savings account records. . While the 2013 NJUN bank records were not submitted, Mr.

In Re Diomed Inc.

394 B.R. 260 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 15, 2008

Clearly Diomed had constitutional standing at every stage without regard to whether or not Endolaser joined in the litigation. But the prudential consideration for standing requires further investigation. Waterman v. … Whether Endolaser can establish a claim for bad faith damages under New York law as part of its rejection claim remains to be determined.

Hutsell v. Allied Interstate

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Aug 19, 2020

COVID-19 fatality rates increase with age and underlying health conditions such as cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, diabetes, and immune compromise.” Wilson v. … Oyler, 397 F.3d at 386 (debtor failed second Brunner prong because he had experience and education to qualify for higher-paying work yet voluntarily chose to work as a pastor of a small church).

In Re Tolson

338 B.R. 359 · United States Bankruptcy Court, C.D. Illinois · Dec 30, 2005

Even though it is a federal exemption, it is clearly de-pendant on state law as the entireties interest is exemptible only to the extent such interest is exempt from process under applicable nonbankruptcy law. … The tenancy is broken and ownership devolves into some form other than by the entirety upon divorce, conveyance out of entireties, 'establishment of a new homestead, or death of either spouse. 765 ILCS 1005/1 c.

In Re Proud Mary Marina Corp.

338 B.R. 114 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Jan 19, 2006

case, and that also conclusively establishes the amount of all other claims asserted against the estate. … The reason for the Bank’s continued willingness, according to Turner, was that the borrowers and guarantors were well-qualified for the loan.

Tese-Milner v. Moon (In Re Moon)

385 B.R. 541 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Apr 23, 2008

Paul that she had seen a bankruptcy attorney “to get information about whether she qualified for bankruptcy....” 3 The Debtor was “very unclear” on whether she had actually initiated the filing of a bankruptcy petition on … Paul asks the Court to do exactly that which the Second Circuit has explicitly forbidden — to achieve under the cloak of “equitable discretion” what the Code’s unambiguous language clearly prohibits.

Hannaford Bros. v. Ames Department Stores, Inc. (In Re Ames Department Stores, Inc.)

316 B.R. 772 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Oct 14, 2004

But the fact that Vickerry conveyed a portion of Tract # 1 to Home Depot is not relevant, as Home Depot — aside from being another retailer — clearly was a “successor or assign” of Vickerry’s. 87 New Hampshire courts have … See In re E-Z Serve Convenience Stores, Inc., 289 B.R. 45, 50 (Bankr.M.D.N.C.2003) ("[T]he court retains some discretion in determining whether a lease provision that does not explicitly prohibit assignment qualifies as a

Revivify, LLC v. Thrivify LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · Mar 7, 2025

First, specific performance of the agreement is impossible because one of the parties to the agreement is now immune from that remedy. … Co.,26 it held that “the rule is well established that nominal damages may be recovered for the bare infringement of a right unaccompanied by any actual damage.” And in that court’s 1952 decision in Hall v.

In Re Plastech Engineered Products, Inc.

397 B.R. 828 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · Dec 10, 2008

On April 18, 2008, the Court entered an order (docket entry # 1083) granting the Debtor’s motion and establishing both a bar date and a procedure for filing § 503(b)(9) claims. … Of American Turfs total § 503(b)(9) claim of $12,688, the invoices clearly break out the sum of $2,400 for shoveling, removing and otherwise clearing snow, and break out the balance of the charges of $10,288 for applying

In Re Mirant Corp.

348 B.R. 725 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 9, 2006

As the discussion below details, the Settlement should be approved because each of the four prongs established by Cajun Electric weighs in its favor. … The District Court established a different standard to be applied in deciding whether to permit rejection of the BTB. See In re Mirant, 318 B.R. 100, 107-108 (N.D.Tex.2004).

Ford, Jr. v. Landon

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Oklahoma · Aug 11, 2020

preclusion under Massachusetts law are: “(1) the identity or privity of the parties to the present and prior actions, (2) identity of the cause of action, and (3) prior final judgment on the merits.”15 The first element is clearly … Although some of the conduct described by the statute could qualify under the § 526(a)(6) definition of malicious, by no means all of the described conduct qualified.

Spaulding

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Jun 16, 2026

“An express or technical trust requires an explicit declaration of trust, a clearly defined trust res, and an intent to create a trust. … Because the obligation must exist prior to the wrongdoing, a “constructive trust . . . will not qualify for purpose of § 524(a)(4).” Frain, 230 F.3d at 1017.

Arrow Oil & Gas, Inc. v. SemCrude, L.P. (In re SemCrude, L.P.)

407 B.R. 112 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Jun 19, 2009

As a practical matter, an operating agreement is designed to set forth a process by which the well is drilled and the production is established, and to govern the operations of a productive well after it has been established … The Texas Legislature clearly did not intend for this to be the case, given that Texas Article 9 governs Texas § 9.343 to the extent it is not displaced by the statute. .

McCrary v. Barrack (In Re Barrack)

201 B.R. 985 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. California · Oct 15, 1996

These statements clearly related to the Debtors’ financial condition and, hence, the First Amended Complaint did not state a claim for which relief can be granted under Section 523(a)(2)(A). … The injury requirement is the one element of Section 523(a)(6) which is not necessarily met by establishing the elements required under Section 523(a)(2).

The Minesen Company

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Hawaii · Nov 17, 2021

Those cases provide clearly that post-petition notice is sufficient. … But the Fund established that the electric bills can vary even if occupancy does not.