The debtor objected to several proofs of claim by the same creditor. The court denied some of the claims because the claimant failed to meet his burden of proof in establishing the validity of the claims. Factual issues existed on the other claims, so they were set for trial.
You are here
The District of Nebraska offers a database of opinions for the years 1997 to 2011, listed by year and judge. For a more detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search box above.
Subscribe to our opinions RSS feed
The super-priority administrative expense claim granted to the IRS in exchange for the debtor’s use of cash collateral in its Chapter 11 case did not survive the case’s conversion to Chapter 7. The IRS’s lien was subordinated by the terms of § 724(b).
The court reduced the fees awarded to counsel for the committee of unsecured creditors in a Chapter 11 case in which a trustee had been appointed. The court found the committee had unnecessarily involved itself in matters better left to the trustee.
The court denied the corporate defendants’ motion to quash and motion for protective order, ruling (1) the out-of-state defendants should be deposed in Nebraska and (2) the topics to be covered in the deposition were relevant for purposes of discovery.
The court granted a protective order for the deposition of an out-of-state defendant in an action to recover an account receivable. The defendant’s counterclaim did not alter the general rule that defendants should be deposed in their home states.
The court liberally construed the Nebraska exemption statutes and found that a debtor may claim a tool of the trade exemption in a vehicle, even if the debtor is unemployed on the petition date, as long as the debtor can show intent to begin working again.
The court denied defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim and lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The complaint alleged sufficient grounds for relief, and the plaintiffs’ claims were not objected to, so the court has jurisdiction.
The court dismissed debtor’s claims under the state Wage Payment & Collection Act for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Debtor could go forward on the remaining claim of violation of the discharge injunction because recoupment is a factual issue.
The court granted the trustee’s request to employ special counsel to recover property of the estate, finding little likelihood that counsel’s representation of creditors in the case would create a conflict of interest in its limited role for the trustee.
The court granted debtors’ motion for summary judgment on the creditors’ § 523(a)(2)(A) complaint. Although the debtors’ business closed after accepting the creditors’ down payment for a pool, there was no evidence of fraud or misrepresentation.