|
New Cases For the Week of November 6, 2000 - November
10, 2000
Brought
to you by BKINFORMATION.COM - The Source
for Business Bankruptcy Information on the Internet AND BKCLAIMS
Marketplace - The Online Market For Bankruptcy Claims
November 10,
2000
|
|
Case
|
Court
|
Holding
|
In
re K.D. Co.
(requires Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in to view) |
10th Cir. BAP |
Because
a confirmed Ch. 11 plan provided that any unpaid administrative
claimants could seek disgorgement from professional administrative
claimants who had been paid, the confirmation order was res judicata,
and the bankruptcy court did not err in awarding an unpaid
administrative claimant a $40,000 judgment against debtor's counsel.
While a confirmed plan has indicia of a "new
contract" between the debtor and pre-confirmation claimants, it is
also clear that such a plan, once confirmed by court order, is much more
than a mere contract and cannot be defeated under contractual principles
by a party in interest who claims to have not agreed, or to have been
mistaken about the effect of the plan. |
In
re Van Tol
(requires Adobe Acrobat Reader plug-in to view) |
10th Cir. BAP |
A
dairy farmer/debtor's "capital retain account" with an
agricultural cooperative is a general intangible.
An "account debtor," for the purposes of the
UCC is "any person who is obligated on an account, chattel paper or
a general intangible.
Under New Mexico law, a capital retain is a debt owed
to the debtor/farmer (as opposed to an equity interest in the
cooperative), distinguishing In re Bonnema, 219 B.R. 951 (Bankr. N.D.
Tex. 1998).
Despite restrictions on pledging capital retains
contained in the agricultural cooperative's bylaws, a lender's perfected
interest in a debtor/farmer's general intangibles captured the debtor's
future rights to payment from his capital retain account. Section
9-318 of the New Mexico UCC (voiding contractual restrictions on
transfer between an account debtor and the account obligee) vitiated the
cooperative's transfer restrictions. |
| U.S. v. Pope |
8th Cir. |
Although
the federal Sentencing Guidelines indicate that in fraudulent loan cases
the actual or expected "loss" to the lender/victim
should be offset against the amounts the lender has recovered, or can
expect to recover from pledged collateral, the unencumbered assets of a
defendant's bankruptcy estate are not "pledged assets" and
thus cannot reduce the amount of the "loss" for sentencing
purposes, even if the lender may recover in full as an unsecured
creditor. |
|
|
|
November 9,
2000
|
|
Case
|
Court
|
Holding
|
| In re CSI Enterprises, Inc. |
10th Cir. |
Asset
protection trust did not justifiably rely on alleged false financial
statements of target company when trust settlor, who acted as investment
advisor to trust, and could replace trustee at any time, made purchase
decision and merely transferred purchased shares to trust after the fact
as investment vehicle. |
| In re Bell |
2d Circuit |
The
conversion of a case from Chapter 11 to Chapter 7 does not trigger a new
period for the filing of objections to exemptions. |
|
|
|
November 7,
2000
|
|
Case
|
Court
|
Holding
|
| In re Cassell |
6th Cir. BAP
|
The
bankruptcy court abused its discretion when it sanctioned a claimant
under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9011 for failing to conduct an adequate
prefiling investigation into the reasonableness of the factual
allegations underlying the proof of claim. |
| In re Miller |
10th Cir. |
The
bankruptcy court did not err in refusing to modify an order approving a
compromise and sale after it was discovered that a third party asserted
an ownership interest in a substantial portion of the real property to
be sold. |
| In re Bentz Metal Products Co. |
7th Cir. |
Employees'
State law statutory lien claims for vacation pay under a collective
bargaining agreement were preempted by the Labor Management Relations
Act, such that the lien claims were trumped by the secured claim of the
debtor's lender. |
|
|
|
November 6,
2000
|
|
Case
|
Court
|
Holding
|
|