|
New Cases For the Week of April 16, 2007 - April 20, 2007
Brought to you by BKINFORMATION.COM - The Source for Business Bankruptcy Information on the Internet
Click here to search prior New Opinion summaries.
April 20, 2007 |
Case |
Court |
Holding |
April 19, 2007 |
Case |
Court |
Holding |
Florida Dep't of Revenue v. Piccadilly Cafeterias, Inc.
(DBN Subscription Required) |
11th Cir. |
District court's affirmance of bankruptcy court's decision granting stamp-tax exemption on the sale of assets is affirmed over claim that the district court erred in holding that the 11 U.S.C. section 1146(c) stamp-tax exemption may apply to pre-confirmation asset sales. |
In re Jones
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr. S.D. Tx. |
11 U.S.C. 511, passed as part of BAPCPA, requires payment to tax claimants of the applicable nonbankruptcy law rate of interest, but where such law does not provide for payment on penalties, interest and legal fees, such interest is not required in bankruptcy. |
In re J.S. II, LLC
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr. N.D. Il. |
An attorney employed as special counsel under 11 USC 327(e) must have previously represented the debtor. |
In re Armstrong World
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr. De. |
$65 pots of coffee are not a reasonable expense for attorneys working in war rooms in preparation for a hearing.
Attendance at a confirmation trial of a testifying expert, by four professionals, and three supporting professionals was not necessary, and not compensable. |
In re W.R. Grace & Co.
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr. De. |
Although an asbestos claimant can ratify an attorney's previously-unauthorized filing on behalf of the claimant, ratification cannot take place after expiration of an applicable deadline. Where a law firm lacked client authority to file asbestos claims at the time of the filing, and did not obtain clients' ratification until after expiration of the filing deadline, the claims were not allowable. |
In re Tobar
(DBN Subscription Required) |
Bankr. Md. |
Where a debtor disclosed transfers of non-exempt property that lacked consideration , and the court found that the debtor lacked the intent to defraud creditors, and acted "with the very highest motivation . . . to protect his family," the debtor nevertheless was denied a discharge under section 727 since he knew his actions would "delay" creditors. |
| |
|
|
April 17, 2007 |
Case |
Court |
Holding |
In re: M.T.G., Inc.
(DBN Subscription Required) |
E.D. Mi. |
"Fraud on the court" does not require an intent to deceive the court. Reckless disregard for the truth or willful blindness is sufficient. Where an officer of the court (here, a trustee) represents that he is disinterested and fails to adequately disclose a side agreement to be paid by the debtor's secured lender, he has committed a fraud on the court. |
In re: Benz
(DBN Subscription Required) |
9th Cir. BAP |
A counterparty’s communication to a debtor that the terms of a contract do
not obligate that party to perform certain acts is not, in and of
itself, a violation of the automatic stay. |
In re: Lopez
(DBN Subscription Required) |
9th Cir. BAP |
The Supreme
Court’s recent disapproval of expansive use of Rooker-Feldman
saps that doctrine of utility in bankruptcy and operates to
overrule prior BAP precedents applying that doctrine |
In re: Carnduff
(DBN Subscription Required) |
9th Cir. BAP |
The bankruptcy court has the
power to grant a partial discharge of student loans even when the
debtor’s earning capacity is expected to improve, if that
improvement will be insufficient for the debtor to pay the full
balance due without an undue hardship. However, in that event,
the burden of proof remains with the debtor to establish undue
hardship as to any portion of the debt to be discharged. |
In re: Boyajian
(DBN Subscription Required) |
9th Cir. BAP |
The bankruptcy court erred in finding that when a debt has been assigned by the original creditor to a third party assignee, the assignee creditor must have reasonably
relied on the materially false financial statement provided by
the debtor. |
In re: Mendez
(DBN Subscription Required) |
9th Cir. BAP |
Pre-bankruptcy credit counseling is not a jurisdictional
prerequisite. Failure to obtain counseling is a matter of individual eligibility,
subject to traditional principles of waiver and estoppel. |
| |
|
|
April 16, 2007 |
Case |
Court |
Holding |
Weber v. United States Trustee
(DBN Subscription Required) |
2nd Cir. |
Where all three bankruptcy courts that had ruled had ruled the same way on a question of law (the retroactive application of an amended homestead exemption law), the Court of Appeals would not accept a direct appeal of the bankruptcy court's ruling. |
Adelphia Bus. Solutions, Inc. v. Abnos
(DBN Subscription Required) |
2nd Cir. |
Affirmance of bankruptcy court's retroactive approval of the decision of debtor to reject under 11 U.S.C. section 365(a) an unexpired, nonresidential lease with appellant lessor is affirmed over claim that the bankruptcy court either lacked equitable authority to make its rejection order retroactive, or it abused its discretion in doing so. |
| |
|
|
|