Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
7,439 results
1.11s
Georgetown 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 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 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 2, 2024
Additionally, [the Debtor] responded to the information subpoena sent by NJDEP in July 2022, clearly understanding that Plaintiff was a valid judgment creditor. … The NJDEP, through the Dam Litigation, established the Debtor’s liability to repair the Dam and his 45% share of the liability.
Cited 0 timesUnknownDe Boer v. Talsma (In re Talsma)
496 B.R. 828 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Texas · Aug 5, 2013
Judicial estoppel is not a rigid and formulaic application of clearly defined tests. See New Hampshire v. Maine, 532 U.S. 742, 750 , 121 S.Ct. 1808 , 149 L.Ed.2d 968 (2001). … Compare 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(8) (creating a general exception to discharge for educational loans, but qualifying the exception in cases where the debtor can show undue hardship), with 11 U.S.C. § 523 (a)(5) and (15) (creating
Cited 2 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 timesPublishedRutkowski v. Adas (In re Adas)
488 B.R. 358 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 7, 2013
Moreover, only those fiduciary relationships that “impose[] real duties in advance of the breach” qualify under the Bankruptcy Code. … Czeblakow provided what appeared to be an excellent simultaneous translation, speaking rapidly enough to keep up with Adas but also clearly and without hesitation.
Cited 8 timesPublishedUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · Sep 20, 2019
Auction Order also provided that “Frank, who signed a contract to purchase the Harbor Drive Property for $1,325,000.00 has agreed to increase her offer to $1,425,000.00 and shall be deemed a stalking horse bidder and a Qualified … This Court held that the “Bankruptcy Code clearly supervenes State Court receivership orders, and this Court has statutory authority under Section 543 to excuse or condition the receiver’s noncompliance with Sections 362
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited 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 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Texas · Aug 28, 2025
This is particularly significant because Congress is clearly capable of creating lookback periods in the Bankruptcy Code. … For the Chapter 15 Case to qualify as a foreign main proceeding, the relevant inquiry is whether Dr. Balzan engaged in significant pre-Petition work to operate or liquidate Geden in Malta.
Cited 0 timesUnknownMcCoy v. Mississippi Department of Revenue
United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Mississippi · Feb 3, 2020
Therefore, her returns did not qualify for dischargeability under BAPCPA’s new definition of that term. … It is well established that Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals are made on the merits.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Michigan · Jul 24, 2023
Second, as further discussed below, the allegations in the Motion, and in the Defendant’s affidavit and attorney Chami’s declaration, do not establish excusable neglect or mistake under Fed. R. Civ. … Second, and in any event, in giving the Defendant legal advice about the deadline for filing an answer in this adversary proceeding, as attorney Chami’s declaration says he did, attorney Chami clearly acted as an attorney
Cited 0 timesUnknownThe City of Atlantic City v. Drummon
United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Feb 14, 2024
“Omissions as well as affirmative misstatements qualify as false statements for Section 727(a)(4)(A) purposes.” Adler v. Ng (In re Adler), 395 B.R. 827, 841 (E.D.N.Y. 2008). … In re Overmeyer is clearly distinguishable because it concerned actual bankruptcy claims propounded by a debtor. Id.
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. Colorado · Dec 2, 2025
BAP 2005) (“[I]t is well established that lack of good faith (or bad faith) is ‘cause’ for dismissal or conversion of a Chapter 13 case under § 1307(c).”); Armstrong v. … The Debtor’s financial position was so tenuous that she qualified for SNAP benefits.
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Mississippi · Feb 3, 2020
Therefore, her returns did not qualify for dischargeability under BAPCPA’s new definition of that term. … It is well established that Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals are made on the merits.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownIn re Genco Shipping & Trading Ltd.
513 B.R. 233 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. New York · Jul 2, 2014
It was clearly meant to achieve a result consistent with Chapter 11, that is, to preserve the business and avoid liquidation. … Lastly, the Debtors point out that the Third Party Releases are qualified by the phrase “to the extent permissible under applicable law,” and thus overcomes any problem regarding overbreadth.
Cited 10 timesPublishedUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · Apr 19, 2022
Thus, the FAA “establishes ‘a liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements.’” Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S. Ct. 1612, 1621 (2018) (quoting Moses H. Cone Mem’l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. … Thus, “a counterclaim by the bankruptcy estate that seeks affirmative monetary relief to augment the estate but does not directly modify the amount claimed would not qualify as a claim to be resolved in ruling on the proof
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · Apr 19, 2022
Thus, the FAA “establishes ‘a liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements.’” Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S. Ct. 1612, 1621 (2018) (quoting Moses H. Cone Mem’l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. … Thus, “a counterclaim by the bankruptcy estate that seeks affirmative monetary relief to augment the estate but does not directly modify the amount claimed would not qualify as a claim to be resolved in ruling on the proof
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Mississippi · Feb 3, 2020
Therefore, her returns did not qualify for dischargeability under BAPCPA’s new definition of that term. … It is well established that Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals are made on the merits.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknownIn re: Oscar Crespo Quiñones v. Arlene Santiago Velazquez
United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Puerto Rico · Nov 17, 2023
Santiago’s two proofs of claim qualified as a domestic support obligation (“DSO”) and finding that she violated the automatic stay and should be held in civil contempt. (Adv. No. 19-000397, Dkt. … To establish an exception to discharge under section 523(a)(15), the following three elements must be established: (1) that the debt in question is to a spouse, former spouse or child of the debtor; (2) the
Cited 0 timesUnknownUnited States Bankruptcy Court, D. South Carolina · Apr 19, 2022
Thus, the FAA “establishes ‘a liberal federal policy favoring arbitration agreements.’” Epic Sys. Corp. v. Lewis, 138 S. Ct. 1612, 1621 (2018) (quoting Moses H. Cone Mem’l Hosp. v. Mercury Constr. … Thus, “a counterclaim by the bankruptcy estate that seeks affirmative monetary relief to augment the estate but does not directly modify the amount claimed would not qualify as a claim to be resolved in ruling on the proof
Cited 0 timesUnknown
Ask Donna