The debtor's managing member and guarantor of its debt objected to the manner in which the primary secured creditor disposed of the debtor's assets. The movant objected to the creditor's proof of claim, arguing that the disposition was not commercially reasonable because the assets were not offered to industry buyers and because the creditor ignored the movant's competing bid and the possibility of an even higher third-party bid. The court determined that the validity and amount of claim as of the petition date were not in dispute, but the movant was contesting the amount of the claim in light of post-petition events. The court ruled that the matter should be heard as an adversary proceeding and deferred the claim objection pending the outcome of the adversary proceeding.
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.
The debtors moved to avoid a judicial lien which impaired their homestead exemption. Under the § 522(f)(2) formula, only a portion of the judicial lien actually impaired the exemption and was subject to avoidance. Two other judicial liens on the property had already been avoided, so those liens were not part of the statutory calculation. The debtors were directed to file an amended post-confirmation plan to clarify how they would deal with the secured claim represented by the unavoided portion of the judicial lien.
The court granted summary judgment to the debtors, ordering that a wholly unsecured junior lien on the debtors' residential real estate may be avoided after the debtors complete Chapter 13 plan payments.
The court granted summary judgment to the debtors, ordering that a wholly unsecured junior lien on the debtors' residential real estate may be avoided after the debtors complete Chapter 13 plan payments.
The court approved a reduced amount of fees for debtor's counsel after finding the requested fees to be excessive and unreasonable, with very little progress made or benefit provided to the estate during the eight months the case has been pending.
In an adversary proceeding to determine whether a debt owed to the State of Nebraska, acting through the Department of Health and Human Services, was discharged in the debtor's previous pre-BAPCPA Chapter 13 case, the State failed to meet its burden of proof by showing that the debt was one for support that had been assigned to the State. Accordingly, the debt did not fall within the discharge exception of § 523(a)(5) and it was discharged.
An unsecured junior lien on the debtors' residential real estate may be avoided after the debtors complete Chapter 13 plan payments. The case law in the Eighth Circuit permits wholly unsecured liens to be stripped off.
The debtor objected to a lender's claim in her Chapter 13 case because she believed she was no longer liable on the debt, as the debt and the property securing it had been awarded to her former spouse in their divorce, and she also believed that whatever liability she might have had on the debt had been discharged in her previous Chapter 7 case. However, she was still named on the promissory note and mortgage, and neither the debt nor the creditor was listed in the Chapter 7, so the debt was not discharged. Under Eighth Circuit law, the Chapter 7 case does not need to be reopened, but the creditor is entitled to file an adversary proceeding to determine the dischargeability of the debt.
An unsecured junior lien on the debtors' residential real estate may be avoided after the debtors complete Chapter 13 plan payments. The case law in the Eighth Circuit permits wholly unsecured liens to be stripped off.
The court denied the trustee's motion for summary judgment in a preference action because the evidence before the court did not establish the element of insolvency, nor was it clear that the property transferred was property of the debtor.