Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
7,439 results
1.13s
United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Texas · Aug 11, 2022
(hereafter, the “Original Buyer”) offered the highest and best qualified bid and thereafter emerged as the buyer of the Properties. … Here such intention is clearly manifested. Id. at 1169 (citations omitted, emphasis added).
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · Dec 11, 2020
Ard, 866 F.3d 682, 690 n.2 (5th Cir. 2017) (noting that factual disputes regarding qualified immunity are more appropriately resolved on summary judgment, not by a 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss); Kitt v. Bailey, No. … The Trustee failed to establish that the evidence forecloses a dispute of material fact as to whether Mr.
Cited 0 timesUnknown472 B.R. 223 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Delaware · Apr 9, 2012
Clearly, the EGI Subordination Agreement was drafted with full knowledge of the existence of the PHONES Notes, so I begin my analysis with that agreement. … (and for the avoidance of doubt includes all Claims against Tribune under Non-Qualified Former Employee Benefit Plans, but does not include Convenience Claims).” (Third Amended Plan, § 1.1.175).
Cited 8 timesPublishedUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Idaho · Oct 13, 2021
As a result, it was alleged the transfers qualified as avoidable fraudulent transfers pursuant to § 548(a). … But whether a transfer qualifies for avoidance as a “fraudulent transfer” pursuant to § 548(a) is not dependent on a specific recipient.
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Oklahoma · Oct 14, 2022
While DFJ, but not Kent, has challenged the Liquidator’s satisfaction of the existence of a “foreign proceeding” under factor (1), the Court finds that the Liquidator has clearly met the requirements of there being a … The location of the debtor's COMI is the sole criterion for qualifying as a foreign main proceeding.
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Missouri · Mar 29, 2024
Establishing a fee for a Chapter 7 case is an art, not a science. the parties signed it on October 29, 2022. The trustee conducted the meeting of creditors on November 15, 2022. … For these reasons, we conclude that the Pre- and Post-Filing Agreements do not clearly describe the services to be provided by the Firm.
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Missouri · Mar 29, 2024
Establishing a fee for a Chapter 7 case is an art, not a science. the parties signed it on October 29, 2022. The trustee conducted the meeting of creditors on November 15, 2022. … For these reasons, we conclude that the Pre- and Post-Filing Agreements do not clearly describe the services to be provided by the Firm.
Cited 0 timesUnknown310 B.R. 79 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Ohio · Feb 6, 2004
Had I done so in the first instance, Judge Polster would have been presented with more clearly defined issues. … For all of the reasons above, this is clearly not the case.
Cited 3 timesPublishedUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Texas · Aug 11, 2022
(hereafter, the “Original Buyer”) offered the highest and best qualified bid and thereafter emerged as the buyer of the Properties. … Here such intention is clearly manifested. Id. at 1169 (citations omitted, emphasis added).
Cited 0 timesUnknownEmpire State Building Co. L.L.C. v. New York Skyline, Inc. (In Re New York Skyline, Inc.)
432 B.R. 66 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jun 21, 2010
If Skyline disputed the results of the electrical survey and resulting ERIF, paragraph 42(C) established a procedure for resolving those disputes: The determination by Lessor’s electrical consultant shall be binding and conclusive … Skyline alleges that the Original Lease required it to pay an ERIF of $2.88 per rentable square foot, (SAC at ¶ 172), and any increase had to be based upon the determination of a qualified electrical consultant hired by ESB
Cited 7 timesPublished237 B.R. 380 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 30, 1999
And unless otherwise qualified, it is a judicial decision that is final and subject to appeal. … However, this change in the methodology for computing interest clearly has no bearing on the question of whether a § 502(b) order falls within the scope of § 1961(a).
Cited 38 timesPublishedGold v. Deloitte & Touche, LLP (In re NM Holdings Co.)
405 B.R. 830 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · Oct 16, 2008
Sarcos L.C., 199 F.Supp.2d 1181, 1193 (D.Utah 2002)(“Clearly accounting and disgorgement are remedies under Utah law, not separate causes of action.”). … Georgia-Pacific’s argument implies that anyone who suborns the chief operating officer of a corporation has by virtue of that success purchased immunity from liability to the principal victim.
Cited 6 timesPublishedUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jan 26, 2023
The governing agreements establish that the post-petition payment obligations were and are obligations of the debtor under a lease. … Or, as the Initiators put it, “Section 365(d)(5) should not be read to include language it clearly does not.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Georgia · Sep 16, 2020
It qualifies Rule 56(c)’s requirement that the non-moving party establish that a genuine dispute of fact exists in cases “where the nonmoving party has not had the opportunity to discover information … Moore filed the Motion and a preliminary response, clearly putting Debtor on notice that he was seeking relief under Rule 56(d) and that his response was not intended to be a full response.
Cited 0 timesUnknownGeorgetown Steel Co. v. Capital City Insurance (In Re Georgetown Steel Co.)
318 B.R. 313 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · Apr 28, 2004
For those entities that cannot obtain workers’ compensation coverage in the voluntary market, the State has an established “assigned risk” or “residual market.” … The Loss Sensitive Rating Plan (LSRP) shall apply to all assigned risk employers qualifying for the Plan. The elements in the LSRP are fixed and premium is [sic] determined and defined below. (Emphasis added).
Cited 6 timesPublishedJotan Inc. v. Barnett (In Re Jotan Inc.)
229 B.R. 218 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Nov 25, 1998
In this Circuit, “[a] preliminary injunction is an extraordinary and drastic remedy not to be granted unless the movant clearly established the ‘burden of persuasion’ ” as to the four requisites. McDonald’s Corp. v. … Only business signed after employment date, qualifies for bonus.
Cited 3 timesPublishedUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Wisconsin · Oct 11, 2022
The latter, temporary provision allowed qualifying debtors to modify their confirmed Chapter 13 plans to provide for payments up to two additional years: A plan modified under paragraph (1) may not provide for payments … From the first, Congress established that this option to prolong plan- length would be available for a limited time.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDeborah J. Piazza, as Chapter 7 Trustee of Row NYC v. CityRow Holdings, LLC
United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Sep 14, 2023
Piazza was appointed as the interim trustee and subsequently qualified as permanent trustee (the “Trustee”). … The Defendants contend that the Landlord was clearly aware of the existence of Holdings LLC in June 2020. Id. at 5.
Cited 0 timesUnknownData Mountain Solutions, Inc. v. Giordano (In re Giordano)
472 B.R. 313 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Mar 30, 2012
This was clearly a failure to account and a defalcation of the Debtor’s fiduciary duties, both to DMS and to Mr. McUmber. C. To What Extent Were the Plaintiffs Harmed by the Defalcation? … The amounts were established in the arbitration, and cannot be questioned here as a matter of collateral estoppel.
Cited 13 timesPublishedSecurities Investor Protection Corp. v. Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC (In re Madoff)
531 B.R. 439 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jun 2, 2015
It is not “an agency or establishment of the United States Government.” SIPA §■ 78ccc(a)(l)(A). … The defense is available only to a qualified religious organization that receives a charitable contribution from an individual debt- or. 11 U.S.C. §§ 548 (d)(3), (4).
Cited 39 timesPublished
Ask Donna