|
New Cases For the Week of November 10,
2003 - November 14, 2003
Brought to you by BKINFORMATION.COM
- The Source for Business Bankruptcy Information on the Internet
|
November
14, 2003
|
|
Case
|
Court
|
Holding
|
In
re Chesnut
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr.
N.D. Tex. |
Although
property was deeded as a
Chapter 13 debtor's wife's
separate property, a secured
creditor violated the
automatic stay by foreclosing
on the property when the
creditor had notice that the
debtor asserted that he had a
community interest in the
property regardless of the
fact that he was not a grantee
on the title. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
November
13, 2003
|
|
Case
|
Court
|
Holding
|
In
re Condor Systems, Inc.
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr.
N.D. Cal. |
As
a sanction for a financial
advisor's violation of its
disclosure obligations in
failing to disclose
negotiations for a business
venture between its principals
and a representative of the
entity that controlled the
Chapter 11 debtor, the
bankruptcy court ordered
denial of more than $500,000
in fees and expenses |
In
re Morton
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr.
N.D. TX |
A
debtor's service of a claim
objection on a creditor's
attorney was not effective
service. An attorney is not an
agent for service unless he
has filed a notice of
appearance and been
specifically designated as an
agent. |
|
|
|
|
November
11, 2003
|
|
Case
|
Court
|
Holding
|
In
re Shaw Industries, Inc.
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr.
W.D. Pa. |
Where
secured creditors are
substantially oversecured, the
debtor is nevertheless
ineligible for priming
financing where the Court
finds that the secured
creditors' equity cushion is
in danger of quickly eroding
due to the debtor's history of
losses. |
In
re Arta Group, Inc.
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr.
N.D. Ill. |
A
permanent injunction against
third party claims precluded
confirmation of the debtor's
plan. |
|
|
|
|
November
10, 2003
|
|
Case
|
Court
|
Holding
|
In
re Innovative Clinical
Solutions, Ltd.
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr.
DE |
A
consummated stock-for-debt
plan was equitably moot for
purposes of revocation of
discharge. The Court has
no authority to grant relief
under 11 USC 1144 without
revoking a dischage. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|