The court denied the trustee's motion to sell a vehicle co-owned by debtor and a non-debtor party because the detriment to the co-owner – loss of the vehicle plus liability for the debt after debtor's discharge – outweighed the benefit to the estate.
You are here
Opinions
United States Courts Opinions (USCOURTS) collection is a collaborative effort between the U.S. Government Publishing Office (GPO) and the Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC) to provide public access to opinions from selected United States appellate, district, and bankruptcy courts.
The District of Nebraska offers a database of opinions for the years 1997 to current, listed by year and judge. For a more detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search box above.
On an objection to claim, § 502(b) requires the claim amount to be determined as of the petition date. Here, the bank's valuation using the NADA guide from the filing month was more credible than debtors' valuation from closer to the time of the hearing.
Debtor's ex-wife sought relief from stay to appeal the divorce, to continue a contempt action and to move against estate property for payment of child support. Court granted the first two motions but said that notice must be given first on final motion.
The debtor's contract with the plaintiff to receive a lump-sum payment in exchange for the transfer of his rights to his monthly military pension payments was not void under statutory anti-assignment provisions concerning military pay.
The court found, on a summary judgment motion, that the debtor's agreement to transfer his rights to future military pension payments in exchange for a lump-sum payment was not void under the anti-assignment provisions of 37 U.S.C. § 701(c).
A state-court judgment that the debtor misappropriated funds did not make a finding of fraud. Rather, the debtor felt she was entitled to the money, so there could not have been any fraudulent intent. The elements of § 523(a)(4) were not established.
The debtor was a mental health provider who pleaded guilty to theft by unlawful taking for overbilling Medicaid. The state argued that the debt resulting from the overpayments was non-dischargeable under § 523(a)(2)(A). The bankruptcy court reviewed the collateral estoppel effect of the criminal conviction, in addition to the alleged overpayments for which there was no criminal or administrative ruling. The court found that the elements of the criminal conviction met the requirements of § 523(a)(2)(A) so that portion of the debt was excepted from discharge. As to the other overpayments, the court found that a trial was necessary in order to make factual findings regarding the debtor’s intent. If the state were to prevail, it would be entitled to actual and treble damages, as well as costs and attorneys fees, and those amounts would be non-dischargeable.