When Is It Appropriate To Disallow An Allowed Claim? By Geraldine E. Ponto and David N. Crapo
|
|
- Charlotte Tyler
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 When Is It Appropriate To Disallow An Allowed Claim? By Geraldine E. Ponto and David N. Crapo Time-honored principles concerning the allowance of claims are breached when the strictures of Section 502(d) of the Bankruptcy Code are applied prematurely. Section 502(d) of the Bankruptcy Code does not provide prophylactic relief to a trustee (or debtor in possession) and prevent a distribution on a deemed allowed claim before a determination has been made by the court that property is recoverable from the claimant or that the claimant is liable on an avoidance claim. 11 U.S.C. 502(d). [T]he purpose of section 502(d) is to ensure compliance with judicial orders. In In re Odom Antennas, Inc., 340 F.3d 705, 708 (8 th Cir. 2003), citing In re Davis, 889 F.2d 658, 661 (5 th Cir. 1989), cert denied, 495 U.S. 933 (1990). The language of Section 502(d) expressly provides for the disallowance of a claim held by an entity that retains an avoidable transfer such as a preference. Odom Antennas, id., citing 11 U.S.C. 502(d). Consequently, a court-ordered determination that an entity has received an avoidable transfer must be made before Section 502(d) can be invoked to disallow a claim. In re Lids Corp., 260 B.R. 680, 684 (Bankr. D. Del. 2001), citing Davis, 889 F.2d at 658. See also In re Atl. Computer Sys., 173 B.R. 858, 862 (S.D.N.Y. 1994) (Section 502(d) envisions some sort of determination of the claimant s liability [under the avoidance provisions of the Bankruptcy Code] before its claims are disallowed... ). As with any other statute, an analysis of Section 502(d) must begin with the plain language of the statute itself. 1 The interpretation of Section 502(d) should be guided by the premise that what Congress says in a statute it means and means in a statute what it says there. Hartford Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Union Planters Bank, N.A., 530 U.S. 1, 6 (2000) 1 Section 502(d) provides: (d) Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of this section, the court shall disallow any claim of any entity from which property is recoverable under section 542, 543, 550, or 553 of this title or that is a transferee if a transfer avoidable under section 522(f), 522(h), 544, 545, 547, 548, 549, or 724(a) of this title, unless such entity or transferee has paid the amount, or turned over any such property, for which such entity or transferee is liable under section 522(i), 542, 543, 550, or 553 of this title. 11 U.S.C. 502(d). # v1
2 (quoting Connecticut Nat. Bank v. Germain, 503 U.S. 249, 254 (1992)). When the statute s language is plain, the sole function of the courts--at least where the disposition required by the text is not absurd--is to enforce it according to its terms. Hartford Underwriters, id. (quoting U.S. v. Ron Pair Enterprises, Inc., 489 U.S. 235, 241 (1989) (citations omitted)). The plain language of Section 502(d) affords relief after the liability of a transferee of an avoidable transfer has been determined. In re LaRoche Indus., Inc., 284 B.R. 406, 408 (Bankr. D. Del. 2002). The determination of liability must come first, or else, as the court determined in the Odom Antennas case, it is impossible to determine whether Section 502(d) applies. See Odom Antennas, 340 F.3d at 708. Despite the plain language of Section 502(d) and the courts that have found that it requires a court-ordered determination of liability before such relief comes into play, Section 502(d) has been invoked as authority to defer distribution on claims that have been deemed allowed under Section 502(a), before a trustee has (i) analyzed whether the claimants potentially received an avoidable transfer, (ii) initiated an avoidance action against the claimants (iii) proven the case and obtained a determination of liability. That type of wholesale, premature application of the statute is improper. It works this way: a trustee identifies all, or almost all, vendors to a debtor as potentially having received an avoidable transfer and moves to temporarily disallow those vendors claims until the trustee reviews and analyzes whether he has grounds to seek to avoid any avoidable transfers to those vendors. The trustee may predicate the relief sought on the fact that he has not yet had time to analyze avoidance claims but believes that once he does, he will be asserting avoidance claims against vendors whose claims have been deemed allowed. No time limit is imposed on the trustee for completing his analysis of avoidance claims under Section 502(d), and, therefore, the only time limit on that process would be the statute of limitations under Section 546(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. 2 Absent an objection by vendors 2 Section 546(a) provides: (a) An action or proceeding under section 544, 545, 547, 548, or 553 of this title may not be commenced after the earlier of # v1
3 affected by such a motion, even though no avoidance action against the vendors has been initiated by the trustee, much less any determination by a court of the vendors liability, the trustee may succeed in disallowing the vendors deemed allowed claims using Section 502(d) as the ground for relief. In effect, the trustee obtains an indefinite injunction precluding a distribution on such claims, without the necessity of satisfying the requirements under Rules 7001(7) and 7065 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. That result also supplants the relief provided in Section 502(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, which deems a claim allowed when a proof of claim has been filed unless a party in interest has objected to the claim. 11 U.S.C. 502(a). 3 Worse yet, Section 502(d) has been applied to claims previously allowed by court order following the trustee's objection to the claim on other grounds. To accomplish that, the trustee merely reserves his right to contest the claims at a later time in the case. It is commonplace for claimants to face the prospect of multiple challenges to a single claim raised at different times during a case. May A Preference Action Be Initiated After A Creditor s Claim Has Been Allowed By Court Order? Beginning with Katchen v. Landy, 382 U.S. 323 (1966), and continuing with Langenkamp v. Culp, 498 U.S. 42 (1990), the Supreme Court has pronounced that the resolution of preference claims is an integral part of the general claims resolution process. Katchen v. (1) the later of (A) 2 years after the entry of the order for relief; or (B) 1 year after the appointment or election of the first trustee under section 702, 1104, 1163, 1202, or 1302 of this title if such appointment or such election occurs before the expiration of the period specified in subparagraph (A); or (2) the time the case is closed or dismissed. 11 U.S.C. 546(a). 3 Section 502(a) provides:.objects. A claim or interest, proof of which is filed under section 501 of this title, is deemed allowed, unless a party in interest.. 11 U.S.C. 502(a) # v1
4 Landy was decided under the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 ( Bankruptcy Act ). In that case, the trustee had interposed an objection pursuant to section 57(g) 4 of the Bankruptcy Act to a creditor s claim on the basis that the claimant had received a voidable transfer that had not been returned to the trustee. The claimant had challenged the bankruptcy court s exercise of summary jurisdiction over the section 57(g) objection. The Supreme Court rejected that challenge and held that the bankruptcy court s summary jurisdiction extended even to that portion of the bankruptcy trustee s claim objection that arose under section 57(g). 382 U.S. at The Court reached that conclusion because [t]he objection under [ 57(g)] is, like other objections, part and parcel of the allowance process and, therefore, was subject to the bankruptcy court s summary jurisdiction. 5 Id. at 330. Accord LaRoche Indus., Inc., 284 B.R. at 409. (Bankr. D. Del. 2002) ( [a] preference action is part and parcel of the claims allowance process), citing In re Asousa P ship, 276 B.R. 55, 73 (Bankr. E.D. Pa. 2002) (applying the Katchen rationale to the effect that a ruling on a proof of claim and a preference action would be deciding the same issues). Following the enactment of the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, the Supreme Court in Langenkamp v. Culp reinforced its earlier teaching in Katchen v. Landy concerning the relationship between the resolution of preference claims to the general claims resolution process. In Langenkamp, the Supreme Court held that, by filing a proof of claim in the bankruptcy case, a 4 When repealed by the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, section 57(g) of the former Bankruptcy Act provided: The claims of creditors who have received or acquired preferences, liens, conveyances, transfers, assignments or encumbrances, void or voidable under this title, shall not be allowed unless such creditors shall surrender such preferences, liens, conveyances, transfers, assignments or encumbrances. 5 It bears noting that under the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978, as amended by the Bankruptcy Amendments and Federal Judges Act of 1984, the question of the summary or plenary jurisdiction has given way to questions of core or non-core jurisdiction. See 28 U.S.C. 157(b) and (c). The Supreme Court s teaching in Katchen v. Landy concerning the relationship as between the resolution of preference actions and the claims resolution process, however, has not been overruled and remains good law. See In re Cambridge Indus. Holdings, Inc., 2003 WL (noting that Katchen v. Landy offers useful insight into the importance of not separating the resolution of a creditor s claim from proceedings to recover avoidable transfers received by the same creditor). Cases such as the district court opinion in In re Cambridge Indus. Holdings, Inc., 2006 WL , * 2 (D. Del. 2006), and In re Bridge Info. Sys., Inc., 293 B.R. 479, 488 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 2003), thus appear to read Katchen v. Landy too narrowly # v1
5 creditor/preference defendant had waived the right to a jury trial in a preference action brought against him. 498 U.S. at 45. In reaching its decision, the court reasoned that, by filing a proof of claim, the creditor/preference defendant triggers the process of allowance and disallowance of claims, thereby subjecting himself to the bankruptcy court s equitable powers. Id. (citations omitted). If the trustee then files a preference action, that action becomes part of the claimsallowance process. Id. (citations omitted). In other words, the creditor s claim and the ensuing preference action by the trustee become integral to the restructuring of the debtor-creditor relationship. 6 Id. That being the case, the reasoning in Langenkamp compels the conclusion that any objection to the allowance of a claim in a bankruptcy case should include at that time any objection to the claim based on a preference or other avoidance theory. The Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 replaced section 57(g) of the former Bankruptcy Act with current Section 502(d). See LaRoche Indus., 284 B.R. at 498 (the legislative history of 502(d) shows that it was derived from then existing law), quoting H.R. Re. no. 595, 95 th Cong., 1 st Sess. 354 (1977), reprinted in App. Pt. 4(d)(i); S.Rep. No. 989, 95 th Cong., 2d Sess. 65 (1977), reprinted in App. Pt. 4(e)(i), U.S. Code Cont. & Admin. News 1978, pp. 5963, 6310, 5787). The provisions of Section 502(d) do not differ substantively from the provisions of repealed section 57(g). See n.5 above. Like repealed section 57(g) of the former Bankruptcy Act, and consistent with the teaching of Katchen v. Landy, the plain language of Section 502(d) of the Bankruptcy Code provides for the disallowance of a claim held by a transferee of an avoidable transfer, unless the amount for which the transferee is liable has been turned over to the estate. See 11 U.S.C. 502(d). The Supreme Court in Katchen v. Landy emphasized that very point with respect to section 57(g) of the former Bankruptcy Act when it stated that the statute contemplates that allowance of a claim may be conditioned on surrender of a preference 6 It does not appear from the Supreme Court s opinion in Langenkamp that the trustee had objected to the preference defendant s proof of claim # v1
6 received with respect to transactions unrelated to the claims. Katchen v. Landy, 382 U.S. at 331(emphasis added). In other words, like the plain language of repealed section 57(g), the plain language of Section 502(d) contemplates the prior determination by the Court that a creditor has received an avoidable transfer as a condition to the disallowance of a claim. What the plain language of section 57(g) and Section 502(d) has never done is to authorize either (i) bringing an avoidance action against a creditor whose claim has been previously allowed, or (ii) withholding a distribution on a previously allowed claim pending the resolution of such an avoidance action against the holder of the claim. 7 The requisite finding that a creditor has received an avoidable transfer must be determined as part of the claims process and not at a later time, especially if that time occurs after a distribution under a plan. LaRoche Indus., id., at As the Supreme Court in Katchen v. Landy instructs, preference actions should be brought either before or at the same time as other claims objections. LaRoche Indus., id. at 409. Failure to do so precludes bringing a subsequent preference action. Id. The bankruptcy court in LaRoche Indus. also considered issues of fairness when interpreting Section 502(d). 284 B.R. at 410. Fairness dictates that [a]ll matters concerning a creditor s claim should be resolved at one time. Id. See also In re Cambridge Indus. Holdings, Inc., 2003 WL * 4 (noting that the joinder of all disputes concerning a creditor s claim 7 For this reason, the opinion of the district court in In re Cambridge Indus. Holdings, Inc., 2006 WL is unpersuasive. It correctly acknowledges that Section 502(d) is a shield the trustee may raise during the claimsallowance process to deflect the claims of any preference defendant, but despite the plain language of Section 502(d), the court actually treats the statute as authorizing preference actions long after the claims-allowance process has been completed and the withholding of a distribution to a creditor s previously allowed claim until the preference action is resolved. Id. * 2. That analysis flies in the face of the rule that all matters related to a creditor s claim should be resolved at one time (see LaRoche Indus., 284 B.R. at 410) and reflects an undue emphasis on policy and practice at the expense of a careful analysis of the plain language of Section 502(d). Other cases holding that the allowance of a claim does not preclude a subsequent preference suit against the creditor ignore the plain language of Section 502(d) and overemphasize their perception of policy and practice considerations, which do not trump the statutory scheme. See e.g. In re TWA Inc., Post Confirmation Estate, 305 B.R. 221, (Bankr. D. Del. 2004); In re Dornier Aviation (North America), Inc., 320 B.R. 831 (E.D. Va. 2005); In re Rhythms NetConnections Inc., 300 B.R. 404 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2003); In re Bridge Info. Sys., Inc., 293 B.R. 479, 488 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 2003) (trustee may refrain from asserting the Section 502(d) defense when objecting to a claim) # v1
7 in a single proceeding should expedite, not delay, the administration of bankruptcy cases). In LaRoche Industries, the court noted that it had become the custom in the District of Delaware to object to claims first and bring preference actions later. LaRoche Indus., id. The court also correctly noted, however, that [l]ocal customs are no basis to ignore the mandates of the Bankruptcy Code and Rules nor are local customs a basis for allowing debtors to take unfair advantage of their creditors. Id. The LaRoche Indus. court concluded that, in addition to the plain language of Section 502(d), issues of fairness precluded debtors from bringing preference actions against creditors whose claims previously had been allowed. Moreover, if an uncontested claim allowed under Section 502(a) of the Bankruptcy Code constitutes a final judgment for purposes of res judicata, then it may be argued that an order of the court allowing a creditor s claim also is final and must be accorded res judicata effect. Under the doctrine of res judicata, or claim preclusion, [a] final judgment on the merits of an action precludes the parties or their privies from relitigating issues that were or could have been raised in that action. EDP Med. Computer Sys., Inc. v. United States, No cv, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 5544, *1 (2d Cir. March 9, 2007)(quoting St. Pierre v. Dyer, 208 F.3d 394, 399 (2d Cir. 2000))(internal citations omitted). Res judicata serves many desirable purposes. It puts an end to, and prevents unnecessary costs resulting from, multiple litigation; it conserves judicial resources, prevents inconsistent decisions and fosters reliance on adjudication. EDP Med. Computer Sys., at *7. The Second and Ninth Circuits have both held that a bankruptcy court order allowing an uncontested proof of claim constitutes a final judgment and is thus a predicate for res judicata. Id. at *9. Claims that could have been adjudicated as part of an action, where the party against the whom the doctrine is used enjoyed a full and fair opportunity to litigate the matter, would be barred under the doctrine of res judicata. Federated Dep t Stores, Inc. v. Moitie, 452 U.S. 394, 398 (1981); Allen v. McCurry, 449 U.S. 90, 94 (1980). Courts are divided as to whether principles of res judicata bar an objection to a previously allowed claim. Compare, Cambridge Indus. Holdings, Inc., 2003 WL , * 2 (Bankr. D # v1
8 Del. 2003) (principles of claim preclusion bar a trustee from contesting a previously allowed claim), with Bridge, 293 B.R. at 484 (principles of claim preclusion do not bar an objection to a previously allowed claim); In re Ampace Corp., 279 B.R. 145, (Bankr. D. Del. 2002) (same). The plain language of Section 502(d) makes the resolution of any preference claim against a debtor a condition to disallowing the claim on the basis of a retained preference. Resolution of the preference claim must occur prior to or contemporaneously with the resolution of other objections, if any, against a creditor s claim. See, e.g., Odom Antennas, 340 F.3d at 661; Atl. Computer Sys., 173 B.R. at 862; In re Enron Corp., 340 B.R. 180, (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2006); LaRoche Industries, 284 B.R. at If a trustee elects not to resolve an avoidance claim as part of the claims resolution process, under the foregoing authorities, the trustee would be precluded from prosecuting that avoidance claim # v1
Augustine, FL not in Debtors' personal name. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA JACKSONVILLE DIVISION In re: Case No. 3:08-bk-1882-PMG Chapter 13 RAY KEMP STANSBURY and JENNIFER L. STANSBURY, Debtors. / ORDER ON DEBTORS' OBJECTION
More informationIn re: Chapter 11. 824 SOUTH EAST BOULEVARD REALTY, INC., Case No. 11-15728 (ALG) MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER. Introduction
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x NOT FOR PUBLICATION In re: Chapter 11 824 SOUTH EAST BOULEVARD REALTY,
More informationDetermining Tax Liability Under Section 505(a) of the Bankruptcy Code
Determining Tax Liability Under Section 505(a) of the Bankruptcy Code Section 505(a) of the Bankruptcy Code (the Code ) provides the means by which a debtor or trustee in bankruptcy may seek a determination
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
Case: 15-50455 Document: 00513327899 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/04/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Summary Calendar In the Matter of: CAVU/ROCK PROPERTIES PROJECT I, L.L.C
More informationVacating a Judgment under Rule 60(b)(4): A Review of the Espinosa Decision
In This Issue Volume 7, Number 6 / June 2010 Vacating a Judgment under Rule 60(b)(4): A Review of the Espinosa Decision Tax Claims in Transnational Insolvencies: A "Revenue Rule" Approach ABI's 17th Annual
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN. In re Case No. 13-23483 JANICE RENEE PUGH, Chapter 13 Debtor.
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN In re Case No. 13-23483 JANICE RENEE PUGH, Chapter 13 Debtor. MEMORANDUM DECISION ON DEBTOR S OBJECTION TO INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE S MOTION
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 13-CV-1074. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (CAB-1922-12)
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections
More informationADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST FEDERAL AGENCIES UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSESSMENT OF CIVIL PENALTIES AGAINST FEDERAL AGENCIES UNDER THE CLEAN AIR ACT The Clean Air Act authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency administratively to assess civil penalties
More informationCase: 09-1166 Document: 00319804259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2009 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No.
Case: 09-1166 Document: 00319804259 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/09/2009 PER CURIAM. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 09-1166 LOU MARRA HOGG S, Appellant v. NOT PRECEDENTIAL STATE OF
More informationHow To Defend A Tax Claim In Bankruptcy Court
Forum Shopping and Limitations on Bankruptcy Court Jurisdiction John D. Snethen Section Chief, Tax Litigation Office of the Attorney General of Indiana 1 Bankruptcy Background What is Forum Shopping? Taxpayer
More informationDECISION AND ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO AVOID BUSINESS PROPERTY MORTGAGE DEFICIENCY JUDICIAL LIEN
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------------X In re: Case No.: 14-75142-ast Deborah Shea and Daniel Shea, Chapter 7 Debtors. ----------------------------------------------------------X
More informationFOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
Page 1 of 10 FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT BAP NOS. MW 06-025, 06-029 Bankruptcy Case No. 04-43698-HJB FREDERICK J. CROCKER and MAUREEN O. CROCKER, Debtors.
More informationIn the Matter of SUSAN MALEWICZ, Chapter 13 MEMORANDUM DECISION
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -----------------------------------------------------------------x In the Matter of SUSAN MALEWICZ, Chapter 13 Debtor. -----------------------------------------------------------------x
More informationMs. Steffen's Bankruptcy Case
T.C. Memo. 2012-264 UNITED STATES TAX COURT PAUL A. BILZERIAN AND TERRI L. STEFFEN, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent Docket No. 3648-98. Filed September 12, 2012. Paul A. Bilzerian
More informationBankruptcy Court Has Broad Discretion to Estimate and Temporarily Allow Claims for Voting Purposes. March/April 2005. Kelly Neff and Mark G.
Bankruptcy Court Has Broad Discretion to Estimate and Temporarily Allow Claims for Voting Purposes March/April 2005 Kelly Neff and Mark G. Douglas Protracted delay in liquidating claims against a chapter
More informationPayment System Override Deems Transaction Not Ordinary
Payment System Override Deems Transaction Not Ordinary Ames Merchandising Corp. v. Cellmark Paper Inc. (In re Ames Dept. Stores, Inc.), 2011 Bankr. LEXIS 969 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Mar. 28, 2011) In Ames Merchandising
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION In re: ) Chapter 7 Liquidation ) marchfirst, INC., et al., ) CASE NO. 01 B 24742 ) (Substantively Consolidated)
More informationCase 13-09004-CL7 Filed 11/06/13 Entered 11/06/13 16:38:19 Doc 66 Pg. 1 of 6
Case 13-09004-CL7 Filed 11/06/13 Entered 11/06/13 16:38:19 Doc 66 Pg. 1 of 6 November 6, 2013 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 325 West "F" Street, San Diego, California 92101-6991
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: * BONNIE LEE WHETSTINE, * Chapter 7 Debtor * * Case No.: 1-05-bk-10057MDF BONNIE LEE WHETSTINE, * Movant * * v. * MOTION
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION MEMORANDUM OPINION
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION In re: ) Case No. 04 B 26948 ) VICTOR AND LINDA WILSON, ) Chapter 13 ) Debtors. ) Judge Pamela S. Hollis MEMORANDUM OPINION
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO In re: ALAN GREENWAY, Bankruptcy Case No. 04-04100 dba Greenway Seed Co., Debtor. MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Appearances: D. Blair Clark, RINGERT,
More informationPrepared by: Hon. Duncan W. Keir, Judge U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Maryland. and. Richard L. Wasserman, Esq.
Memorandum Summarizing Procedures With Respect To Removal Of Bankruptcy-Related State Court Actions To The United States District Court And United States Bankruptcy Court In Maryland Prepared by: Hon.
More informationSIGNED this 31st day of August, 2010.
SIGNED this 31st day of August, 2010. CRAIG A. GARGOTTA UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS AUSTIN DIVISION IN RE: ' CASE NO. 09-12799-CAG
More informationF I L E D August 5, 2013
Case: 12-60648 Document: 00512331827 Page: 1 Date Filed: 08/05/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit F I L E D August 5, 2013 Lyle
More informationPrying Jurisdiction Away From Bankruptcy Courts
Portfolio Media, Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Prying Jurisdiction Away From Bankruptcy Courts Law360,
More informationStern v. Marshall Shaking Bankruptcy Jurisdiction to Its Core? July/August 2011. Benjamin Rosenblum Scott J. Friedman
Stern v. Marshall Shaking Bankruptcy Jurisdiction to Its Core? July/August 2011 Benjamin Rosenblum Scott J. Friedman In Stern v. Marshall, 131 S. Ct. 2594 (2011), the estate of Vickie Lynn Marshall, a.k.a.
More informationInsurance in Bankruptcy
Fear of Losing D&O Insurance in Bankruptcy Is Overblown B y P a t r i c i a J. V i l l a r e a l a n d D o u g l a s R. C o l e he typical D&O insurance policy covers not only a company s directors and
More informationCase 6:14-bk-09462-CCJ Doc 48 Filed 07/20/15 Page 1 of 7
Case 6:14-bk-09462-CCJ Doc 48 Filed 07/20/15 Page 1 of 7 ORDERED. Dated: July 20, 2015 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION www.flmb.uscourts.gov In re: RICHARD S.
More informationHedge Fund. Bankruptcy. The LAW REPORT. Overview of Chapter 15. The definitive source of actionable intelligence on fund law and regulation
hedge LAW REPORT fund law and regulation Bankruptcy Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code Presents Litigation Risks and Liability for Creditors, Counterparties, Service Providers and Others Doing Business
More informationREAL ESTATE ISSUES IN DIVORCE CASES. Steven L. Raynor Raynor Law Office, P.C. 211 Fifth Street, NE Charlottesville, VA 22902
REAL ESTATE ISSUES IN DIVORCE CASES by Steven L. Raynor Raynor Law Office, P.C. 211 Fifth Street, NE Charlottesville, VA 22902 I. Introduction It is typical for divorce attorneys to oversee the transfer
More informationRe: Dischargeability of Court-Ordered Restitution When the Debtor has Filed a Petition in Bankruptcy
1 of 8 6/23/2005 8:28 AM November 30,1994 The Honorable Winona E. Rubin Director of Human Services State of Hawaii 1390 Miller Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Dear Ms. Rubin: Re: Dischargeability of Court-Ordered
More informationCase 12-51502 Doc 3203 Filed 03/13/13 Entered 03/13/13 17:19:29 Main Document Pg 1 of 7
Pg 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI In Re: ) Chapter 11 ) Case No. 12-51502-659 PATRIOT COAL CORPORATION, et al., ) Jointly Administered ) Honorable Kathy Surratt-States
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA WESTERN DIVISION. v. AP No. 08-70044 MEMORANDUM OF DECISION
Document Page 1 of 16 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA WESTERN DIVISION IN RE: DENISE L. EVANS, Case No. 08-71204-CMS-07 Debtor. PREMIER SELF STORAGE, LLC., Plaintiff,
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN MACOMB COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT. Case No. 2012-4691-CH OPINION AND ORDER
STATE OF MICHIGAN MACOMB COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT JOHN E. BUTERBAUGH and CARRIE BUTERBAUGH, Plaintiffs, vs. Case No. 2012-4691-CH SELENE FINANCIAL, LP, JPMORGAN MORTGAGE ACQUISITION CORP., AS TRUSTEE FOR THE
More informationCase: 1:10-cv-00363-WHB Doc #: 31 Filed: 09/02/10 1 of 14. PageID #: 172
Case: 1:10-cv-00363-WHB Doc #: 31 Filed: 09/02/10 1 of 14. PageID #: 172 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION JAMES MEYER, v. Plaintiff, DEBT RECOVERY SOLUTIONS
More informationASBESTOS CLAIMS AND LITIGATION
ASBESTOS CLAIMS AND LITIGATION PFIZER, INC. V. LAW OFFICES OF PETER G. ANGELOS CASE ANALYSIS: PARENT COMPANYASBESTOS LIABILITY July, 2013 ALRA Group Members http://alragroup.com / I. Introduction (F. Grey
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF MISSOURI IN RE: ) ) KEVIN DEAN STOVER and ) Case No. 05-43103 SHERRIE ANN STOVER, ) ) Debtors. ) ORDER GRANTING THE CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE
More informationIndividual Chapter 11 Cases: Case Closing Reconsidered
Individual Chapter 11 Cases: Case Closing Reconsidered Written by: Walter W. Theus, Jr. Executive Office for U.S. Trustees; Washington, D.C. walter.w.theus@usdoj.gov Individuals have been filing chapter
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS WESTERN DIVISION
Document Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS WESTERN DIVISION ) In re: ) ) Chapter 7 YARMYN FELIBERTY, ) Case No. 12-31819 ) Debtor ) ) MEMORANDUM OF DECISION Before the
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: Chapter 11 MIDWAY GAMES INC, et al. Case No. 09-10465 (KG (Jointly Administered Debtors. THRESHOLD ENTERTAINMENT, INC, Plaintiff,
More informationCase 06-03280 Document 35 Filed in TXSB on 11/27/06 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
Case 06-03280 Document 35 Filed in TXSB on 11/27/06 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN RE DAVID WIMBERLY, CASE NO. 05-81669-G3-13 Debtor,
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO In Re: ) ) CHIEF JUDGE RICHARD L. SPEER Paul I. Hickman ) ) Debtor(s) ) ) (Related Case: 00-31579) Paul Hickman ) ) Plaintiff(s) ) ) v.
More informationCase 2:06-cv-02026-CM Document 114 Filed 03/10/09 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS
Case 2:06-cv-02026-CM Document 114 Filed 03/10/09 Page 1 of 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS ) METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE ) COMPANY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION v.
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
2:13-cv-13095-PJD-MJH Doc # 12 Filed 01/30/14 Pg 1 of 10 Pg ID 725 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re: DAVID C. KAPLA, Civil Case No. 13-13095 Honorable Patrick
More informationExpert Analysis 3rd Circuit Ruling Provides Bankruptcy Plans with Broad Preemption Rights. By Dov Kleiner, Esq. Vinson & Elkins
Westlaw Journal ASBESTOS Litigation News and Analysis Legislation Regulation Expert Commentary VOLUME 34, ISSUE 21 / AUGUST 3, 2012 Expert Analysis 3rd Circuit Ruling Provides Bankruptcy Plans with Broad
More informationDirt for Debt Plans in Bankruptcy
Dirt for Debt Plans in Bankruptcy What are the risks and is there anything you can do about them? Presenter: Stephen E. Gruendel What is a Dirt-for-Debt Plan and Why Should a Secured Lender Care? 1. Debtor
More informationClass Proofs of Claim and Class Certification in Bankruptcy. Ravi Vohra, J.D. Candidate 2013
2012 Volume IV No. 29 Class Proofs of Claim and Class Certification in Bankruptcy Ravi Vohra, J.D. Candidate 2013 Cite as: Class Proofs of Claim and Class Certification in Bankruptcy, 4 ST. JOHN S BANKR.
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * Before KELLY, ANDERSON, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.
FILED United States Court of Appeals UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS Tenth Circuit WILLIAM MOSHER; LYNN MOSHER, Plaintiffs - Appellants, FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT November 19, 2014 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk
More informationCASE NO. 1D09-0765. Rhonda B. Boggess of Taylor, Day, Currie, Boyd & Johnson, Jacksonville, for Appellant.
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA ATHENA F. GRAINGER, as personal representative of the ESTATE OF SAMUEL GUS FELOS, Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION
More informationAn Updated Analysis of Recent Postpetition Attorney s Fees Post-Travelers Decisions
An Updated Analysis of Recent Postpetition Attorney s Fees Post-Travelers Decisions Richard J. Corbi Author s Note: Similar issues, analysis, and case arguments appear in my earlier article: Update: Postpetition
More informationCase 15-10952-KJC Doc 826 Filed 08/21/15 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE.
Case 15-10952-KJC Doc 826 Filed 08/21/15 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: CORINTHIAN COLLEGES, INC., ET AL., Debtors. Chapter 11 Case No. 15-10952 (KJC)
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS United States Court of Appeals FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT Fifth Circuit FILED March 3, 2016 No. 15-11188 In re: AMERICAN LEBANESE SYRIAN ASSOCIATED CHARITIES, INCORPORATED;
More informationBeware The Constructive Trust Claim
Portfolio Media. Inc. 860 Broadway, 6th Floor New York, NY 10003 www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 Fax: +1 646 783 7161 customerservice@law360.com Beware The Constructive Trust Claim Law360, New York
More informationNOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 14a0721n.06. No. 13-2126 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
NOT RECOMMENDED FOR PUBLICATION File Name: 14a0721n.06 No. 13-2126 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT PATRICK RUGIERO, v. Plaintiff-Appellee, NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC; FANNIE MAE; MORTGAGE
More informationCase 08-44100 Doc 43 Filed 02/01/11 Entered 02/01/11 08:22:13 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 7
Document Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS CENTRAL DIVISION In re: ERIC J. SARAO Debtor. Chapter 7 Case No. 08-44100-MSH MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON TRUSTEE S APPLICATION
More informationCase 5:06-cv-00503-XR Document 20 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION
Case 5:06-cv-00503-XR Document 20 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS SAN ANTONIO DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, VS. Plaintiff, HENRY D. GOLTZ, EVANGELINA
More informationWho is Responsible Here? Responsible Persons in Chapter 11 Cases
Who is Responsible Here? Responsible Persons in Chapter 11 Cases Written by: Walter W. Theus, Jr., Trial Attorney, Executive Office for U.S. Trustees While the underlying facts may vary somewhat, a familiar
More informationUnited States Bankruptcy Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division. Transmittal Sheet for Opinions for Posting
United States Bankruptcy Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division Transmittal Sheet for Opinions for Posting Will this order be Published? Yes Bankruptcy Caption: Morris Senior Living, LLC,
More informationForeign Representative Alert: Chapter 15 Gap Period Relief Subject to Preliminary Injunction Standard. September/October 2013
Foreign Representative Alert: Chapter 15 Gap Period Relief Subject to Preliminary Injunction Standard September/October 2013 Veerle Roovers Mark G. Douglas Unlike in cases filed under other chapters of
More informationBy John J. Lamoureux Carlton Fields, P.A. Tampa, Florida. On April 20, 2005 President Bush signed into law the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and
RECENT CHANGES TO THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY CODE WHAT CONSTRUCTION LAWYERS SHOULD KNOW AND THE POTENTIAL IMPACT SUCH CHANGES MAY HAVE ON CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS By John J. Lamoureux Carlton Fields, P.A.
More informationCase: 04-16887 Doc #: 122 Filed: 10/14/2008 Page 1 of 9 OPINION DESIGNATED FOR ON - LINE PUBLICATION BUT NOT PRINT PUBLICATION
Case: 04-16887 Doc #: 122 Filed: 10/14/2008 Page 1 of 9 SO ORDERED. SIGNED this 14 day of October, 2008. ROBERT E. NUGENT UNITED STATES CHIEF BANKRUPTCY JUDGE OPINION DESIGNATED FOR ON - LINE PUBLICATION
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 14-2052 IN RE: EDWARD J. PAJIAN, Debtor-Appellant. Appeal from the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois,
More informationUS CORNER. In re French: Extraterritorial Application of the US Bankruptcy Code s Fraudulent Conveyance Provisions
US CORNER In re French: Extraterritorial Application of the US Bankruptcy Code s Fraudulent Conveyance Provisions Lynette C. Kelly, Counsel, Bankruptcy & Reorganization Group, Shearman & Sterling LLP,
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS WESTERN DIVISION. Chapter 13
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS WESTERN DIVISION In re: Ballard Dwight Brannan and Carol Lynn Brannan Debtors. Bankruptcy Case No. 02 B 71411 Chapter 13 MEMORANDUM
More informationJurisdiction and Venue in Chapter 15 Selected Issues
Jurisdiction and Venue in Chapter 15 Selected Issues Prepared by: Jeanne P. Darcey Sullivan & Worcester LLP Boston, MA jdarcey@sandw.com October 8, 2013 Please visit us on our website at www.sandw.com
More informationNo Unwaivable Right to File an Involuntary Bankruptcy Petition. September/October 2010. Mark G. Douglas
No Unwaivable Right to File an Involuntary Bankruptcy Petition September/October 2010 Mark G. Douglas The ability to file for bankruptcy protection and receive a discharge of debts is sometimes perceived,
More informationINSURANCE POLICIES. by Bankruptcy Code Section 541. That section provides, in pertinent part:
BANKING LAW JOURNAL by Bankruptcy Code Section 541. That section provides, in pertinent part: The commencement of a case under section 301, 302, or 303 of this title creates an estate. Such estate is comprised
More informationStatement of Jurisdiction. Central District of California dismissing the Debtors chapter 13 case. The Bankruptcy
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 CALIFORNIA BANKRUPTCY GROUP JOHN F. BRADY & ASSOCIATES, APLC JOHN F. BRADY, ESQ., State Bar #00 ANIKA RENAUD-KIM, ESQ., State Bar #0 1 West C Street, Suite 0 San Diego, CA 1 Tel: (1-1
More informationMEMORANDUM DECISION STRIKING DEBTOR S CHAPTER 7 PETITION FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH 11 U.S.C. 109(h)(1)
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK POUGHKEEPSIE DIVISION ---------------------------------------------------------x In re: ANTHONY J. RIOS, FOR PUBLICATION Chapter 7 Case No.
More informationHow To Find Out If A Bankruptcy Attorney Is Disinterested
Case 13-04639-8-RDD Doc 68 Filed 11/04/13 Entered 11/04/13 16:14:55 Page 1 of 7 SO ORDERED. SIGNED this 4 day of November, 2013. Randy D. Doub United States Bankruptcy Judge IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY
More informationProperty Can Be Recovered from Subsequent Transferee Without First Avoiding Fraudulent Transfer to Initial Recipient. September/October 2005
Property Can Be Recovered from Subsequent Transferee Without First Avoiding Fraudulent Transfer to Initial Recipient September/October 2005 Robert E. Krebs The power of a bankruptcy trustee or a chapter
More informationCase 1:06-cv-22273-SH Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/07 13:02:36 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case 1:06-cv-22273-SH Document 23 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/25/07 13:02:36 Page 1 LAWRENCE KATT, M.D., individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiffs, UNITED STATES DISTRICT
More informationHOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS AND BANKRUPTCY - STRATEGIES
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS AND BANKRUPTCY - STRATEGIES DENNIS J. LeVINE, ESQ. Fla. Bar No. 375993 Dennis LeVine & Associates, P.A. P.O. Box 707 Tampa, Florida 33601 (813) 253-0777 (813) 253-0975 (fax) dennis@bcylaw.com
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND NICOLE MARIE CRUZ, Plaintiff, v. C.A. No. 05-38S HARTFORD CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. DECISION AND ORDER WILLIAM E. SMITH, United
More informationCase:10-35794-SBB Doc#:69 Filed:03/23/11 Entered:04/07/11 14:32:49 Page1 of 8
Case:10-35794-SBB Doc#:69 Filed:03/23/11 Entered:04/07/11 14:32:49 Page1 of 8 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Bankruptcy Judge Sid Brooks In re: ) ) Bankruptcy Case No. CHRISTOPHER
More informationCase 08-01176-AJC Document 1 Filed 03/01/2008 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION
Case 08-01176-AJC Document 1 Filed 03/01/2008 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA MIAMI DIVISION In re: JOSE SANCHEZ Case No.: 01-42230-BKC-AJC and FANNY SANCHEZ, Chapter
More information08-01789-brl Doc 4602 Filed 12/21/11 Entered 12/21/11 10:44:02 Main Document Pg 1 of 7
Pg 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SECURITIES INVESTOR PROTECTION CORPORATION, v. Plaintiff-Applicant, Adv. Pro. No. 08-1789 (BRL) SIPA Liquidation (Substantively Consolidated)
More informationCase 1:15-cv-00009-JMS-MJD Document 29 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: <pageid>
Case 1:15-cv-00009-JMS-MJD Document 29 Filed 04/15/15 Page 1 of 9 PageID #: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION DARYL HILL, vs. Plaintiff, WHITE JACOBS
More informationCase 14-31103 Document 72 Filed in TXSB on 10/22/14 Page 1 of 9
Case 14-31103 Document 72 Filed in TXSB on 10/22/14 Page 1 of 9 IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION IN RE: DENNIS THOMAS BEACHAM CASE NO: 14-31103
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case :-cv-000-l-blm Document 0 Filed 0 Page of 0 0 IN RE: ELEAZAR SALAZAR, Debtor, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, v. ELEAZAR SALAZAR, Appellant, Appellee. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT
More informationNos. 2 09 1120, 2 10 0146, 2 10 0781 cons. Order filed February 18, 2011 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS SECOND DISTRICT
Order filed February 18, 2011 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1). IN
More informationLETTER-DECISION AND ORDER. Before the Court is the motion of Peter and Renee King ( Debtors ) to disallow in part
PETER A. ORVILLE, P.C. PETER A. ORVILLE, ESQ. Attorneys for Debtors 30 Riverside Drive Binghamton, New York 13905 MELVIN & MELVIN, PLLC LOUSE LEVINE, ESQ. Attorneys for Manufacturers and Traders Trust
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION In re Beverley Jackson, Case No. 08-61931 Chapter 7 Debtor. Hon. Marci B. McIvor / Michael Stevenson, Trustee, Plaintiff, v.
More informationArbitration in Seamen Cases
Arbitration in Seamen Cases Recently, seamen have been facing mandatory arbitration provisions in their employment agreements which deny them their rights to a jury trial under the Jones Act, and also
More information: In re: : Chapter 11 : WORLDCOM, Inc., et al., : Case No. 02 B 13533 (AJG) : Debtors. : Jointly Administered :
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK : In re: : Chapter 11 : WORLDCOM, Inc., et al., : Case No. 02 B 13533 (AJG) : Debtors. : Jointly Administered : ORDER GRANTING DEBTORS MOTION
More informationDespite A Very High Income, Chapter 7 Debtor s May Succeed. Pamela Frederick, J.D. Candidate 2016
Despite A Very High Income, Chapter 7 Debtor s May Succeed 2015 Volume VII No. 9 Despite A Very High Income, Chapter 7 Debtor s May Succeed Pamela Frederick, J.D. Candidate 2016 Cite as: Despite A Very
More informationUnited States Bankruptcy Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division
United States Bankruptcy Court Northern District of Illinois Eastern Division Transmittal Sheet for Opinions for Posting Will this opinion be Published? YES Bankruptcy Caption: In re: Ronald W. Ruhl Bankruptcy
More informationOPINION. The Plaintiff has filed a motion to dismiss the Counterclaim of Advanced
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE CHAPTER 7 AMERICAN REHAB & PHYSICAL THERAPY, INC. CASE NO. 04-14562 ROBERT H. HOLBER, TRUSTEE PLAINTIFF V. DOLCHIN SLOTKIN
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO ) ) ) ) ) MEMORANDUM OF OPINION 1
The court incorporates by reference in this paragraph and adopts as the findings and orders of this court the document set forth below. This document was signed electronically on January 28, 2009, which
More informationSection 362(c)(3): Does It Terminate The Entire Automatic Stay? Michael Aryeh, J.D. Candidate 2015
2014 Volume VI No. 2 Section 362(c)(3): Does It Terminate The Entire Automatic Stay? Michael Aryeh, J.D. Candidate 2015 Cite as: Section 362(c)(3): Does It Terminate The Entire Automatic Stay?, 6 ST. JOHN
More informationAttorneys for Plaintiff One Lincoln Center Syracuse, New York 13202 MEMORANDUM-DECISION, FINDINGS OF FACT, CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND ORDER
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------------- IN RE: MICHAEL A. LEMON CASE NO. 99-60083 LYNN M. LEMON Chapter 13 Debtors -----------------------------------------------------------
More informationHOW TO COMPLETE A PROOF OF CLAIM: A PRIMER FOR NON-BANKRUPTCY PRACTITIONERS
HOW TO COMPLETE A PROOF OF CLAIM: A PRIMER FOR NON-BANKRUPTCY PRACTITIONERS by Margaret M. Anderson and Folarin S. Dosunmu Lord, Bissell & Brook LLP, Chicago, Illinois Come to the ABA Business Law Section
More informationAGUIRRE v. UNION PACIFIC RR. CO. 597 Cite as 20 Neb. App. 597. N.W.2d
AGUIRRE v. UNION PACIFIC RR. CO. 597 At the hearing on the motion to withdraw his plea, he requested that the court take judicial notice of a six-page portion of the U.S. statutes. The court took judicial
More informationCase 8:09-bk-11551-MGW Doc 53 Filed 07/30/13 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Case 8:09-bk-11551-MGW Doc 53 Filed 07/30/13 Page 1 of 7 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION IN RE: Randy L. Jones, Case No. 8:09-bk-11551-MGW Chapter 13 Debtor. /
More informationWHAT TO SAY WHEN YOUR PROOF OF CLAIM IS FILED AFTER THE BAR DATE 1
WHAT TO SAY WHEN YOUR PROOF OF CLAIM IS FILED AFTER THE BAR DATE 1 Bradley R. Hightower United States Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of Alabama Law Clerk to the Honorable Margaret A. Mahoney What
More informationUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division
PUBLISHED UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Richmond Division IN RE: WILLIAM G. DADE ) Case No. 00-32487 ANN E. DADE ) Chapter 7 Debtors. ) ) ) DEBORAH R. JOHNSON ) Adversary
More informationIN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE : AL JAZEERA AMERICA, LLC, : : Plaintiff, : : v. : C.A. No. 8823-VCG : AT&T SERVICES, INC., : : Defendant. : : MOTION TO STAY OCTOBER 14, 2013 LETTER OPINION
More informationThe purchaser of a tax lien is the holder of a tax claim under 11 U.S.C. 511(a) Andrew Reardon, J.D. Candidate 2015
2014 Volume VI No. 26 The purchaser of a tax lien is the holder of a tax claim under 11 U.S.C. 511(a) Andrew Reardon, J.D. Candidate 2015 Cite as: The purchaser of a tax lien is the holder of a tax claim
More informationAvoiding Forfeiture of Estate Causes of Action Triggered by Conversion to Chapter 7. May/June 2007. Benjamin Rosenblum
Avoiding Forfeiture of Estate Causes of Action Triggered by Conversion to Chapter 7 May/June 2007 Benjamin Rosenblum The ability to borrow money during the course of a bankruptcy case is an important tool
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA CHARLOTTESVILLE DIVISION
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA CHARLOTTESVILLE DIVISION SALLIEMAE SERVICING, ET AL., CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:01CV00066 Appellants, v. OPINION CHRISTOPHER P. BANKS,
More information