Case law

Daniels v. County of Chester, Tax Claims Bureau (In Re Daniels)

304 B.R. 695 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 16, 2003

Government officials, performing discretionary functions, are entitled to qualified immunity for their actions, if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … Bair is entitled to qualified immunity from plaintiffs Section 1983 action for damages will depend on whether she is able to show that her conduct did not violate clearly established *710 statutory or constitutional rights

Phoenician Mediterranean Villa, LLC v. Swope (In re J & S Properties, LLC)

545 B.R. 91 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 5, 2015

Accordingly, we must not confuse the qualified immunity analyses associated with actions brought by estate beneficiaries with the qualified immunity analyses of actions brought by third parties. 6 *105 As to the latter, i.e … This Court notes that Antoine was addressing absolute immunity, and left open the issue of whether qualified immunity would require the same analysis.

Maya v. Philadelphia Gas Works (In Re Maya)

8 B.R. 202 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jan 16, 1981

The debtors’ *207 claim under § 1983 clearly arises in and is related to their proceeding in bankruptcy. … We conclude that the Economic Opportunity Act and ECAP program would clearly fit within that category. 4 .

Cech v. Maloney (In Re Maloney)

146 B.R. 168 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 21, 1992

Only the debtor’s equity above the judicial liens could so qualify. (Emphasis added.) Napotnik, 679 F.2d at 320 . … The trustee asserts in the objection that other debts listed in the schedules also qualify as joint debts.

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].”

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.

Saunders v. Reeher (In Re Saunders)

105 B.R. 781 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Sep 27, 1989

Clearly, one question is whether the debtor suffered any damage due to defendants’ delay in awarding her a higher education grant pending the receipt of a bankruptcy discharge. … According to the policy of PHEAA, the debtor's discharge of her prior student loan obligation now and hereafter renders her eligible for higher education grants for which she otherwise qualifies.

Rotondo Weirich Enters., Inc. v. Sundt/Layton (In re Rotondo Weirich Enters., Inc.)

583 B.R. 860 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 16, 2018

Thus, the Complaint's allegations do not definitively establish the existence of a joint venture. … Pa. 1985) : Implicit in the bankruptcy concept of turnover is the idea that the property being sought is clearly the property of the Debtor but not in the Debtor's possession.

Kahl v. Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board (In Re Kahl)

240 B.R. 524 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Oct 29, 1999

The Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code provides for the appropriation of state funds for the payment of certain claims against qualifying state agencies. Tex.Civ.Prac. & Rem.Code § 109.001 - 109.006. … Next, the Coordinating Board clearly has neither waived sovereign immunity nor consented to be sued in this Court.

In Re Mozingo

222 B.R. 475 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 15, 1998

The Lombardo and Ersa cases establish that the lien at issue works exactly like the normal Pennsylvania process for execution on personalty. … No reference is made to Lombardo or Ersa, which qualifies the language of § 788.1(a) by rendering it subordinate to the conflicting language of § 788.1(b).

Zebley v. Olexa (In Re Olexa)

317 B.R. 290 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Nov 17, 2004

all, of the debts incurred by debtor in this instance qualify as “necessaries” for purposes of 23 Pa.C.S.A. § 4102. … The new “wrinkle” wrought by 48 P.S, § 116 was to establish that the wife also was liable in such situations, albeit secondary to her husband’s liability.

Lesniewski v. Kamin (In Re Lesniewski)

246 B.R. 202 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 13, 2000

The holding of Hutto , therefore, was not just that Congress had spoken sufficiently clearly to overcome Eleventh Amendment immunity in enacting § 1988, but rather that the Eleventh Amendment did not apply to an award of … Section 523(d) also provides attorney’s fees but the prevailing debtor must establish that the creditor's position was not substantially justified to qualify.

In Re Gillespie

113 A.L.R. Fed. 705 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Feb 14, 1990

However, in accordance with a program established pursuant to a consent decree in a nationwide class action involving FHA-insured mortgages, Ferrell v. … Clearly, as Mr.

Hiser v. Pennsylvania, Department of Public Welfare (In Re St. Mary Hospital)

125 B.R. 422 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 5, 1991

Hoffman establishes that “a State that files no proof of claim .. •. would not be subjected to monetary recovery.” 109 S.Ct. at 2823 (emphasis added). … Presumably, this decision is cited to establish that the Commonwealth and its agencies are distinct entities. However, our decision in St.

Philadelphia Entertainment & Development Partners, L.P. v. Pennsylvania Department of Revenue (In re Philadelphia Entertainment & Development Partners, L.P.)

549 B.R. 103 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Apr 8, 2016

Sovereign Immunity 22 As established by the Eleventh Amendment to the United States Constitution, the States are generally immune from suit in federal court. See, e.g., Blanciak v. … Not only has the Trustee failed to cite to any basis for this Court to And the Gaming Board’s interpretation of § 1326(b) to be clearly erroneous, 53 the Trustee’s interpretation of § 1326(b) is at odds with established principle

Watts v. Pennsylvania Housing Finance Co. (In Re Watts)

76 B.R. 390 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jun 30, 1987

The Debtors clearly were denied HEMAP benefits for which they were qualified, making out a prima facie § 525(a) case, and the only argument with which the Defendants have countered basically admits that the bankruptcy filing … If aware of the practices of the Defendants in issue here, there is no doubt that otherwise-qualified debtors, also qualified for HEMAP benefits, would be discouraged from filing for bankruptcy, or from applying for HEMAP

Smith v. United States (In Re Smith)

447 B.R. 435 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 14, 2011

The IRS’ position on sovereign immunity is simple and direct. … First, the proceeds clearly cannot qualify as “earnings from services,” so they cannot come into the estate via Section 1207(a)(2).

In Re Houck

184 B.R. 21 · United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 17, 1995

Entireties property is immune from process by a creditor to satisfy a debt owed by only one of the spouses. … Significantly, the court stated: The trustee asserts in the objection that other debts listed in the schedules also qualify as joint debts.

Berger v. Commonwealth (In re Berger)

600 B.R. 491 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · Mar 29, 2019

The Bergers argue that the Supreme Court's decision in Katz established the proposition that in rem proceedings in bankruptcy court preclude a sovereign immunity defense by the States, and a lien-stripping action under §§ … requires a showing of a constitutional basis for passing the law, and the law itself must unequivocally and clearly expresses an intent to abrogate sovereign immunity with respect to its terms. 51 Congress's exercise of

Williamson v. Denson (In Re Williamson)

11 B.R. 791 · United States Bankruptcy Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · May 26, 1981

The Code qualifies this “exemption” by restricting the exemption to that interest which would have been exempt from process under applicable non-bankruptcy law. The U. S. … Rather, the common law of Pennsylvania establishes an immunity from process for entireties property where a creditor holds a judgment against one spouse only.