|
New Cases For the Week of July 2, 2007 - July 6, 2007
Brought to you by BKINFORMATION.COM - The Source for Business Bankruptcy Information on the Internet
Click here to search prior New Opinion summaries.
July 5, 2007 |
Case |
Court |
Holding |
In re Sherman
(DBN Subscription Required) |
9th Cir. |
Where sections of the Bankruptcy Code other than section 707(a) address types of conduct that are alleged to be grounds of dismissal for "cause" under section 707(a), those more-specific provisions trump the general "cause" standard and preclude dismissal under section 707(a) based upon such conduct. |
In re Bucci
(DBN Subscription Required) |
6th Cir. |
A debt owed by a corporate officer who failed to cause a debtor corporation to make monthly contributions to pension and fringe benefit funds for employees' benefit under a CBA, was not excepted from discharge under 11 USC 523(a)(4). The debt was a mere contractual obligation. |
In re Craig White
(DBN Subscription Required) |
7th Cir. |
A bankruptcy court denial of a Chapter 13 plan that would allow debtors to surrender a vehicle to a creditor and pay nothing on account of the difference between the loan's balance and the collateral's market value is affirmed where the court interprets a 2005 amendment to the Bankruptcy Code as giving the creditor the right to an unsecured deficiency judgment after surrender of the collateral in a situation where the debt exceeds the current value of the collateral, unless the loan contract itself provides that the loan is without recourse against the borrower |
| |
|
|
July 2, 2007 |
Case |
Court |
Holding |
US v. Jacobs
(DBN Subscription Required) |
11th Cir. |
Reversal of an order of the Bankruptcy Court, in which the Bankruptcy Court determined that defendant's federal income tax debt is dischargeable in bankruptcy and that he had not willfully attempted to evade or defeat a tax within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. section 523(a)(1)(C) is affirmed where the Bankruptcy Court applied an overly-strict legal standard for willfulness, and the undisputed facts demonstrate as a matter of law that defendant willfully attempted to evade or defeat his taxes. |
| |
|
|
|