You are here

Judge Brian S. Kruse

Heather Ann Wright, Ch. 13, BK23-80638-BSK (Nov. 2, 2023)

The bankruptcy court denied a debtor’s objection to the claim of a creditor asserting an attorney’s lien in real estate awarded to her in divorce proceedings. The court ruled that, under Nebraska law, although an attorney does not have a general or possessory attorney’s lien against a client’s real estate, an attorney’s charging lien can attach to real estate that is the subject of and recovered in an action.

Gordon & Shirley Hitchcock v. American Mortg. Co. (In re Wesley Howard Hitchcock), Ch. 12, BK22-40480-BSK, A22-4023-BSK (Sept. 20, 2023)

In a matter of first impression in this district, the bankruptcy court considered how to harmonize a federal agency’s Touhy regulations with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure where documents are sought from an opposing litigant and not subpoenaed or requested from the federal agency.

Wesley Howard Hitchcock v. American Mortg. Co. (In re Hitchcock), Ch. 12, BK22-40480-BSK, A22-4021-BSK (Sept. 20, 2023)

In a matter of first impression in this district, the bankruptcy court considered how to harmonize a federal agency’s Touhy regulations with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure where documents are sought from an opposing litigant and not subpoenaed or requested from the federal agency.

Max Christian Kant & Ann Marie Kant, Ch. 7, BK20-40616-BSK (Nov. 28, 2022)

A creditor’s pre-petition state court action to rescind a warranty deed and to quiet title to real estate as against the debtors was pending when the Chapter 7 bankruptcy case was filed. The creditor filed a proof of claim, but did not object to dischargeability or discharge. The parties stipulated that the creditor’s claim would be estimated at zero for purposes of distribution to unsecured creditors, and the bankruptcy court ordered that the trustee should not pay that creditor’s claim.

Daniel J. Casamatta, Acting U.S. Trustee v. Karen Wright (In re Wright), Ch. 7, BK21-80939, A22-8011 (Sept. 7, 2022)

The court denied the pro se debtor a discharge under §§ 727(a)(2), (a)(3), (a)(4) and (a)(5), finding after a trial that the debtor misrepresented her true financial position in her schedules and statement of financial affairs. She amended these only after the U.S. Trustee investigated, found discrepancies, and filed a motion to dismiss for bad faith.

In re Fern E. Paziak, Ch. 7, BK22-80020-BSK (May 25, 2022)

The court denied a creditor’s motion for relief from stay to compel debtor’s specific performance of a pre-petition contract to sell her home. The court found the contract to be executory, as neither party had performed as of the petition date, and it was deemed rejected under § 365(d)(1). The creditor’s right to specific performance is a claim in the bankruptcy case, which can be reduced to money damages.

Pages

Subscribe to RSS - Judge Brian S. Kruse