Case law

In Re Miller

435 B.R. 561 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 5, 2010

. § 522 (d) and has established its own statutory exemptions; See, Matter of Salzer, 52 F.3d 708, 712 (7th Cir.1995). … Although this passage is clearly dicta, it is consistent with the decision in Tenneco and with ERISA’s legislative history.

Matter of GCI, Inc.

131 B.R. 685 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Aug 22, 1991

Debtor’s management and nonunion personnel are not immune either. … There is no evidence concerning the manner in which the company determined whether or not any particular employee was qualified under the standards and factors established by the contract. 3 Without this evidence, in light

Radcliffe v. International Painters & Allied Trades Industry Pension Fund (In Re Radcliffe)

372 B.R. 401 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Jul 19, 2007

The statutory scheme clearly evidences Congress’ intent that the beneficiary of an ERISA-qualified plan is to receive the benefits to which he is entitled under the plan unless the conduct of the beneficiary in his status … The evidence in this case establishes quite clearly that International directed its actions against the debtor’s entitlement to receive payment of his monthly pension benefits; intentionally undertook that action; and did

Unroe v. United States Ex Rel. Department of Treasury (In Re Unroe)

144 B.R. 85 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Mar 31, 1992

To be eligible for an award under this section, the party must exhaust its administrative remedies within the Internal Revenue Service, must establish the position of the United States in the proceeding was not substantially … Thus, Congress clearly evidenced its intent not to hold the IRS liable for an unjustified position held only in the early stages of a controversy before this point in reached.

Matter of Gifford

93 B.R. 636 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 7, 1988

This holding “is consistent with the well established principle that the bankruptcy estate inures to whatever rights the debtor had at the time the petition was filed.” … The principle is now so firmly established, however, that it must be followed and applied.

Matter of Berndt

34 B.R. 515 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 1, 1983

. § 401 (a) (1976), in order to qualify the Fund as tax exempt. … Clearly he was both the settlor and beneficiary. Debtors argue that the Sears Plan’s anti-alienation provision precludes the debtors’ funds from passing to the bankruptcy estate.

Tabor v. Employee Benefits Committee (In Re Cress)

121 B.R. 1006 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Nov 15, 1990

The Plan was first established in 1956 and restated effective January 1, 1990. … ERISA qualified plans are not on its illustrative list of property interests that qualify for exemptions.

Gouveia v. Pulley (In Re Pulley)

111 B.R. 715 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Oct 12, 1989

Such accounts are clearly includable in the estate. ... … Clearly he was both the settlor and beneficiary.

In Re Thompson

396 B.R. 5 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 5, 2008

The record establishes that the debtor and his wife Heather A. Thompson filed a Form 1040A U.S. … Again, the debtor’s interest in the subject payment is clearly property of his bankruptcy estate, and the sole question before the court is the extent of that interest.

In Re Vale

204 B.R. 716 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 24, 1996

, does clearly reflect income. … As the Miller court stated: The standards applicable to determining the validity of Treasury regulations are well established.

Eric S Richards and Catherine Elaine Richards

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 29, 2020

Sovereign immunity is abrogated as to 5 The pro forma return excluded the taxable income from the sale of farm assets qualifying for §1232 treatment in order to compute the taxes owed. … What is left is a paragraph that clearly prohibits set off as a means for “post- petition payment of any and all claims”.

In Re Bowling

116 B.R. 659 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Jun 7, 1990

Bowling called her indicating a desire to repay the discharged debt in order to re-establish the Debtors’ credit. McLane said that they could do that. Later, when Mrs. … Fidelity would have loaned the new money if the Debtors qualified for the loan even if they did not pay the old loan. People who have discharged loans in bankruptcy are treated no differently than other customers. 4.

In Re Haraughty

403 B.R. 607 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 1, 2009

Without a statute allowing a creditor to pursue the debtor’s entitlement to such wages, they would be immune from collection.... … From these other examples, the Court concludes that a fund or type of property does not have to be protected in its entirety to qualify as an exemption.

Yoon v. Krick (In Re Krick)

373 B.R. 593 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Sep 12, 2007

The record clearly establishes that transfer of whatever interest was held in the subject real estate by Brenda on the date of confirmation of her Chapter 13 plan was made by means of a quit claim deed to her parents subsequent … This transfer clearly violated the provisions of paragraph 7 of the confirmation order.

Delange v. Tsikouris (In Re Tsikouris)

340 B.R. 604 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 30, 2006

These were devices by which the state sought to establish and enforce a lien in the proceeds, the better to collect them securely. … The foregoing clearly establishes that the Seventh Circuit has not analyzed the liability of an individual for unpaid "employer component” obligations to an ERISA-qualified employee benefit plan under the "fiduciary” principles

In Re Delbecq

368 B.R. 754 · United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Indiana · Apr 26, 2007

Debtor’s student loans do appear to qualify in that regard. … Clearly, the merits of Debtor’s argument turn on the meaning of “special circumstances” as used above.

Matter of VanMeter

137 B.R. 908 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Feb 25, 1992

An either/or test has, thus, been established by which a state law will fall if one of two conditions is met. … They determined that “by naming those sections of the I.R.C. which designate ERISA-qualified plans, [the exemption statute] clearly makes reference to ERISA plans.” Pitrat, 947 F.2d at 427 .

In Re Snider Farms, Inc.

125 B.R. 993 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Mar 8, 1991

Thus, good faith alone does not immunize a party from a civil contempt sanction for noncompliance with a Court order. McLean v. Central State, etc., 762 F.2d 1204 , 1210 (4th Cir.1985). … This the Trustee has clearly shown, and the Court finds the Respondent in civil contempt of this Court for knowingly violating the orders of this court.

Matter of Haffner

25 B.R. 882 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Dec 16, 1982

Further, the evidence established that the debtors owed $4,800 in bin payments. … Clearly the enforcement of the “setoff” requirement is an attempt to collect a pre-petition debt.

Baldin v. Calumet National Bank (In Re Baldin)

135 B.R. 586 · United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Indiana · Nov 20, 1991

This is clearly not the issue before this Court. … affidavits clearly created a genuine issue of material fact.