Although the debtor intentionally provided a materially false financial statement to the lender in order to obtain money, the debt should not be excepted from discharge under § 523(a)(2)(B) because the lender could not reasonably have relied on it.
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.
A creditor's administrative expense claim for goods sold post-petition but pre-conversion was not timely filed. The debtor gave proper notice of the post-conversion claims bar date under Rule 1019, and no authority existed for enlarging the time
The debtor falsely listed assets amounting to 20 percent of his total assets on his financial statements, rendering them materially false, but the bank's reliance on those statements was unreasonable because it should have conducted an inspection
The debtors' Chapter 13 plan may not discriminate among unsecured creditors by giving preferential treatment to an unsecured claim resulting from a bad check unless the debtors can show they will face criminal prosecution if the debt isn't paid in full
The court has broad discretion in determining the proper remedy for a fraudulent conveyance. Here, where debtor received no benefit from the conveyance, the appropriate remedy was to annul the note & mortgage and return debtor to its previous position
Collateral is valued as of the confirmation date, so post-petition increases in value are included when the claim is determined. The plan could not be confirmed, however, because debtors proposed to keep property before paying all creditors in full
Reported at 98 B.R. 490. Post-confirmation, funds held by the Ch. 13 trustee are property of the debtor, not the estate, & the IRS's levy on such funds doesn't violate the stay. The bankruptcy court can't interfere with tax collections from non-debtors
The Chapter 11 farm debtors were denied confirmation of their plan; it was not feasible and it violated § 1129(b)(2)(B). In addition, the creditor did not hold a security interest in government farm program commodity certificates paid to the debtors
Sovereign immunity protected the United States and the State of Kansas from the plaintiff's complaint for conversion, and neither party had waived immunity under § 505 or § 106, so the bankruptcy court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over them
The debtors' appeal was interlocutory. The appeal concerned matters, such as adequate protection and participation in farm programs, that were not final because the underlying disputes were not finally resolved.