| New Cases For the Week of
January 29, 2001 - February 2, 2001 
  Brought
        to you by BKINFORMATION.COM - The Source
        for Business Bankruptcy Information on the Internet AND BKCLAIMS
        Marketplace - The Online Market For Bankruptcy Claims 
  
    
      | February 2,
        2001 |  
      | Case | Court | Holding |  
  
    
      | In
        re M.M. Winkler and Assoc. (DBN Subscription Required)
 | 5th Cir. | The
        language of 11 USC 523(a)(2) focuses on the type of the debt, not the
        culpability of the debtor or whether the debtor personally benefited
        from the debt.  Accordingly, an innocent general partner of a
        debtor who owes a fraud debt to a partnership creditor may not discharge
        such debt. |  
      | In
        re Jeter | 8th Cir. | A
        debtor's entitlement to postpetition alimony payments is not property of
        the estate under 11 USC 541(a)(5)(B) |  
  
    
      | February 1,
        2001 |  
      | Case | Court | Holding |  
  
    
      | In
        re Family Snacks, Inc. | 8th Cir. BAP | A
        debtor can reject a collective bargaining agreement even after it has
        sold substantially all of its assets. A debtor's failure to reject a collective bargaining
        agreement does not automatically result in the assumption of the
        agreement.  |  
      |  |  |  |  
  
    
      | January 31,
        2001 |  
      | Case | Court | Holding |  
  
    
      | In
        re The Ginther Trusts (DBN Subscription Required)
 | 5th Cir. | Arguments
        not presented at the bankruptcy court level, including the issue of
        whether a purchaser acted in good faith, will not be considered by the
        Court of Appeals. Where the bankruptcy court had previously determined
        that it had subject matter jurisdiction over a debtor (i.e., by finding
        that the debtor was an eligible "person"), and the decision is
        not successfully appealed, a creditor appealing a subsequent sale order
        cannot assert  that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction. The bankruptcy court did not err in finding that a
        fractured co-ownership situation, arising after the division of certain
        testamentary trusts, was a de facto joint venture under applicable State
        law, and thus eligible as a "person" to file  bankruptcy. |  
      |  |  |  |  |