Case law

Jules R. Feiffer

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. New York · Mar 28, 2025

This is not to say that further administration after a Chapter 13 debtor’s death is never permissible; it clearly is under some circumstances. … Thus, in order to qualify as a debtor under Chapter 11, the debtor must be a “person.”2 As noted above, a probate estate is not a “person” within the meaning of the Code.

In Re Henning

420 B.R. 773 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Tennessee · Nov 6, 2009

Nardi’s affidavit states that after construction of the Denmark property was completed, the debtors “were not able to satisfy all of the conditions to qualify for the construction loan to become a permanent 30-year fixed … Jarnigan, 2008 WL 2944902 , *2 (E.D.Tenn.2008); however, in addressing the issue, courts have established various guidelines to be used on a case-by case basis. Id.

Smith-Pena v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (In re Smith-Pena)

484 B.R. 512 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 2, 2013

Such a result is entirely inconsistent with the purpose of the MCCCDA. 209 Mass.Code Regs. 32 qualifies the rescission right of obligors (by requiring them to have encumbered their ownership interest in the property) and … Therefore, Regulation Z clearly affords the Debtor, as a mortgagor, a right to rescind the Transaction.

Miller v. Dow (In Re Lexington Oil & Gas Ltd.)

423 B.R. 353 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Oklahoma · Jan 27, 2010

The defendants claim that the transactions qualify as valid secured loans that were properly repaid from proceeds of liquidated collateral. All in all, a very interesting and complex question. … Instead, Dow and Cox argue that the only evidence before the Court established that the combined operations of Resources and Oak Hills were insolvent in 2007, and that such evidence is insufficient to establish that Oak Hills

Mashala Investments, LLC v. Storm

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

“[A]n ordinary business relationship does not qualify as a technical trust. In re Morales, 2013 WL 3335052, at *6 (Bankr. N.D. Ga. June 26, 2013). … that Plaintiff did not actually have a property interest in the funds provided to BinaNat by Plaintiff or in the funds repaid to BinaNat by the borrowers, or is making some other legal argument, the argument is not clearly

Irwin v. Beloit Corp. (In Re Harnischfeger Industries, Inc.)

246 B.R. 421 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Alabama · Feb 29, 2000

.”)- Clearly, then, simply because a court has jurisdiction over a case does not mean that it is the proper venue for the case to be heard. … (C) 30 days after a trustee qualifies in a chapter 11 reorganization case but not later than 180 days after the order for relief. 21 . See Burlingame v.

Kerin Enterprises Holding Company, Ltd., as Succes v. Marklin

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · Sep 27, 2023

In the instant case, the Defendant’s conduct falls within the third category, as it was clearly motivated by profit or gain. … The Plaintiff has established that the Defendant’s actions were both willful and malicious.

In Re Webb

210 B.R. 266 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Mar 25, 1997

The joint subcommittee’s recommendation, therefore establishes a statutory exemption for all causes of action for personal injury and the proceeds derived from any court award or settlement. … The language of the agreement is self-serving and clearly structured to enable the debtor to exclude the payment from gross income under I.R.C. § 104 as a settlement "on account of personal physical injury.”

In Re 50-Off Stores, Inc.

213 B.R. 646 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Texas · Sep 12, 1997

The Fifth Circuit was clearly not happy with what appears to have been a rather heavy-handed abuse of the sealing authority on the part of the district judge. … However, a district court observed, with respect to the work product doctrine that "this doctrine 'establishes a zone of privacy for strategic litigation planning and prevents one party from piggybacking on the adversary’

Bernstein v. Donaldson (In Re Insulfoams, Inc.)

184 B.R. 694 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 19, 1995

-I- FACTS Debtor was incorporated in 1979 and was in the business of insulating roofs, tanks, and buildings for commercial and industrial establishments. … Debtor undoubtedly would have qualified for a license had defendants bothered to apply for one on debtor’s behalf.

In Re AppliedTheory Corp.

312 B.R. 225 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jul 14, 2004

“Because the presumption in bankruptcy cases is that the debtor’s limited resources will be equally distributed among his creditors, statutory priorities are narrowly construed.” 56 And relying on long established Supreme … Even more clearly, the claimed right fails to meet Bildisco’s requirements, which limit the estate’s exposure to “the reasonable value of those services.”

Walker v. Got'cha Towing & Recovery, LLC (In re Walker)

551 B.R. 679 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Georgia · Jun 17, 2016

Regardless of the Debtor’s mental state when he filed his Complaint, the Complaint clearly asserts a violation of the automatic stay. … Accordingly, the court’s holdings in Whiting-Turner do not clearly demonstrate the role of the core/non-core distinction.

Bavelis v. Doukas (In re Bavelis)

571 B.R. 278 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Ohio · Feb 22, 2017

The value of the stock and options was never established, Tr. at 872-75. Mr. … Indeed, if it were otherwise, a defendant would have it in his power to perpetrate a fraud with immunity, depriving the victim of all redress, if he simply has the foresight to include a merger clause in the agreement.

Baxter v. Baxter

United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Jan 26, 2023

In order to establish that a debt for attorney fees and costs is “in the nature of alimony, maintenance or support” of a debtor's child, a plaintiff must establish that the attorney fees and costs were awarded to a parent … Yeates, 807 F.2d at 878 (debt could be considered in `nature of support’ under federal bankruptcy law, even though it would not qualify as support under state law).

Sugarman v. IRZ Consulting, LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. California · Apr 24, 2025

immunity). … Oskar, 247 F.3d 986, 992 (9th Cir. 2001). 8 Applying these standards to the evidence presented on this 9 second motion for summary judgment, establishes genuine issues of 10

Sternklar v. Heritage Auction Galleries, Inc. (In Re Paul)

399 B.R. 81 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 4, 2008

Clearly our dispute isn’t with you. We have a great relationship, and I see no reason why it shouldn’t continue as such. Hopefully you will appreciate the reasons we are taking this action[.] … to present a conflict sufficient to override the presumption in favor of arbitration. 115 Courts applying the same approach to core matters, however, have reached “widely-divergent conclusions both with respect to what qualifies

In Re Plant Insulation Co.

469 B.R. 843 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. California · Mar 15, 2012

(c) A trust established under section 524(g) offers substantial advantages over a trust not established under that law. … The statute states clearly that the trust is to assume only the liabilities of the Debtor.

Ditech Holding Corporation

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Nov 23, 2024

Apr. 9, 2012) (explaining plaintiff did not establish the servicer received a QWR where plaintiff failed to allege sufficient facts showing that it contained the required information under § 2605(e)). … Nov. 9, 2004) (dismissing a RESPA QWR claim in part because “[i]n his amended complaint, plaintiff never claims that he sent defendant a qualified written request”).

Hamilton v. Hamilton (In Re Hamilton)

390 B.R. 618 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Arkansas · Jun 16, 2008

Omissions from the schedules qualify as a false oath if they are made knowingly and with fraudulent intent. In re Sears, 246 B.R. at 347 (citing Mertz v. … The circuit court case was concluded by some type of informal probation not clearly shown by the record. The Debtor testi *628 fied that he neither pleaded guilty nor was adjudicated guilty.

Originala Petroleum Corp. v. Beta Financial & Investments Corp. (In Re Originala Petroleum Corp.)

39 B.R. 1003 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · May 11, 1984

In equity, the court ruled, a plaintiff need not establish all the elements of actionable fraud required in a suit for monetary damages. … The court held at 999: Clearly plaintiff should not prevail if India has a bona fide legal claim of breach of contract...