Case law

Szanto v. Internal Revenue Service (In re Szanto)

574 B.R. 862 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · Jun 13, 2017

However, “the right to sue as established by Bivens is qualified and is not absolute.” Adams v. Johnson, 355 F.3d 1179, 1183 (9th Cir. 2004). … . § 106 governs sovereign immunity as it applies in bankruptcy.

Technologies International Holdings Inc. v. Kentucky (In Re Technologies International Holdings Inc.)

234 B.R. 699 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Kentucky · Jun 11, 1999

After finding Congress had clearly expressed its intent to abrogate sovereign immunity in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, the Court stated, at page 59, 116 S.Ct. 1114 : Thus our inquiry into whether Congress has the power … Congress clearly abrogated sovereign immunity for selected sections of the Bankruptcy Code in § 106.

Trina Dee, Inc. v. Township of Plainfield (In Re Trina Dee, Inc.)

18 B.R. 330 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 15, 1982

The minimum requirements for stating a cause of action in a civil rights action have been well established by case law in this jurisdiction. … that would justify qualified immunity [for the City of Independence].”

In Re Kedrowski

284 B.R. 439 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Wisconsin · Aug 28, 2002

Grants received under social welfare programs that did not require recipients to establish individual need have not qualified for tax-exempt status. … Finally, the debtor suggests that the tribe’s sovereign immunity somehow impacts the determination in this case. Between the debtor and the trustee, however, there is clearly no issue of sovereign immunity.

In Re Hughes

7 B.R. 791 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Tennessee · Dec 18, 1980

According to the Senate report, one of the five aspects of the old law that caused it to be “basically and seriously defective” was that “it [did] not permit some individuals with regular income to qualify, such as small … The language of the Bankruptcy Code is unambiguous and clearly broad enough to include social security benefits in the bankruptcy estate in a Chapter 13 case.

Kish v. Farmer (In Re Kish)

238 B.R. 271 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 30, 1999

The district court also raised the issue of the DMV’s Eleventh Amendment immunity sua sponte. … The term “actual pecuniary loss” clearly connotes measurable damages from particular instances of wrongdoing.

Clark v. Bakst (In re Trafford Distributing Center, Inc.)

520 B.R. 147 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. · Oct 28, 2014

from suit under derived or qualified judicial immunity. … Even if the Barton doctrine does not apply, and the state causes of action exist, those causes of action are barred by operation of derived or qualified judicial immunity.

Tri-City Turf Club, Inc. v. Kentucky Racing Commission (In Re Tri-City Turf Club, Inc.)

203 B.R. 617 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Kentucky · Dec 20, 1996

sovereign immunity, authorize Congress to validly waive such sovereign immunity in light of the Eleventh Amendment. … The court concludes, from the above language, that Congress clearly intended to abrogate sovereign immunity of the states for actions brought pursuant to those sections set forth in § 106(a) above.

Quinn v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. (In Re Sturm)

121 B.R. 443 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 28, 1990

In sum, these decisions cover the entire spectrum of the judicial pronouncements regarding the standards for potential immunity of bankruptcy trustees established by the various Circuits described at pages 447-448 supra. … immunity.

Schmidt v. White (In Re White)

28 B.R. 240 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Mar 9, 1983

The rule which permits conversion to nonexempt property is clearly inapplicable here. Cf. Butz v. Wheeler, 17 B.R. 85, 89 (Bkrtcy.S.D.Ohio 1981). … Virginia law permits those qualified to claim exempt property or money, the value of which does not exceed $5,000.00. Va.Code Ann. § 34-4 (1982 Cum.Supp.). 2 .

Bedford Computer Corp. v. Israel Aircraft Industries, Ltd. (In Re Bedford Computer Corp.)

114 B.R. 2 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Hampshire · Feb 15, 1990

Bedford sought discovery, using the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to establish that there is personal jurisdiction in this case and that IAI has no immunity. Bedford has filed a Motion to Compel. 7. … SOVEREIGN IMMÚNITY IAI’s claim of sovereign immunity at this point is premature.

Blumenberg v. Yihye (In Re Blumenberg)

263 B.R. 704 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York · Jul 6, 2001

There are circumstances in which it may be held that bankruptcy trustees “derive qualified judicial immunity for acts taken within their authority as an officer of the court”, but this is an affirmative defense to a complaint … In Solar Financial Services, the bankruptcy court found that a trustee’s obtaining permission from the court to abandon records was in itself sufficient to qualify the trustee for judicial immunity, without any need to obtain

In Re Omine

329 B.R. 343 · United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · Aug 26, 2005

Weatherford, and Sam Pennington, currently an attorney with the Chapter 13 trustee’s office and a debtor’s attorney prior to taking that position, were qualified as expert witnesses. Both Ms. Weatherford and Mr. … The notice clearly was sent in violation of the automatic stay and again threatens various actions the Florida DOR intended to take against the debtor, including incarceration, garnishment, and revoking his drivers’ license

Gibson v. United States (In Re Gibson)

176 B.R. 910 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Oregon · Oct 5, 1994

Clearly, by filing its proof the Internal Revenue Service falls within the parameters of the statutory waiver of either § 106(a) or (b). … It had no reason to raise the issue of immunity.

United States Ex Rel. Central Savings Bank v. Lasich (In Re Kinross Manufacturing Corp.)

174 B.R. 702 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Michigan · Nov 7, 1994

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. Id. at 1011 . … Clearly, any trustee has a duty to conserve the assets of the bankruptcy estate.

In Re Hersch

57 B.R. 667 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Virginia · Feb 11, 1986

Under these settled principles, the proper resolution of the issue before the Court turns on whether the trust created for the debtor qualifies as a spendthrift trust. … Absent a clear expression of the testator’s intent, the Court must attempt to determine whether *670 or not the requisite intent is established by implication.

Harden v. Texas Department of Transportation (In Re Aer-Aerotron, Inc.)

181 B.R. 268 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. North Carolina · Jan 20, 1995

If an informal proof of claim is sufficient, then clearly DOT has waived its sovereign immunity. The Fourth Circuit has a very broad definition of what constitutes an informal proof of claim. … defined and well established.

Stanziale v. New Jersey Ex Rel. Commissioner of Transportation (In Re Theobald Industries, Inc.)

53 B.R. 506 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 21, 1984

Congress clearly expressed an intent to abrogate the sovereign immunity of states so as to permit a debtor to resolve state tax matters in the bankruptcy court, leading this Court to conclude that it has jurisdiction over … Given the title of § 106, “Waiver of sovereign immunity,” and the language of § 106[b], the Court finds that Congress clearly intended to abrogate the sovereign immunity of the states in proceedings to offset allowed governmental

Matter of Schafroth

81 B.R. 509 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Iowa · Dec 23, 1987

DISCUSSION The sole issue before the court is whether the debtors qualify as “family farmers” for purposes of Chapter 12. … Clearly, the corporation owns the farm but the debtors operate the farm. The Bank does not otherwise contest the debt requirement.

Hardy v. United States Ex Rel. Internal Revenue Service (In Re Hardy)

161 B.R. 320 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Georgia · Sep 20, 1993

The issue is whether the doctrine of sovereign immunity bars the imposition of monetary damages against the government for the IRS’ willful violation of the permanent injunction established by 11 U.S.C. § 524 (a)(2) upon … Accordingly, Taylor is distinguishable and does not control in determining whether § 106(a) establishes a waiver of sovereign immunity when the government is charged with a § 524 violation.