The district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's decision under § 523(a)(2)(B) that a secured creditor's reliance solely on financial statements indicating that a partner's assets were being used to secure partnership debt was unreasonable
Court ruled that bank acquiesced in debtor's sale of collateral & failure to apply all proceeds to bank debt; debt was dischargeable because there was no intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditor, nor was there a willful & malicious property conversion
On appeal, the district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's decision to appoint a Chapter 11 trustee under § 1104, agreeing that evidence of debtor's mismanagement of assets and failure to make full disclosures justified appointment of a trustee
On appeal, the district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's decision to appoint a Chapter 11 trustee under § 1104, agreeing that evidence of debtor's mismanagement of assets and failure to make full disclosures justified appointment of a trustee
Court overruled secured creditor's objection to Chap. 13 plan, holding that the debtors need pay only the allowed amount of the claim (the fair market value of the collateral), rather than the full amount owed on the finance company's recourse obligation
Reported at 31 B.R. 77. Under the plain language of section 523(a)(5)(A), a debt for child support arising in connection with a paternity decree rather than a separation agreement, divorce decree, or property settlement agreement is dischargeable
Reported at 10 B.R. 285. Debtor's vehicle was used extensively in and was necessary to his continued employment as a traveling insurance salesman, so it was exempt as a tool of the trade for lien avoidance purposes under 11 U.S.C. section 522(d)(6)
Court denied motion for appointment of a trustee under 11 U.S.C. sec. 1104(a) or an examiner under sec. 1104(b) because no cause for doing so had been shown. The creditors' committee was active and could adequately represent the interests of creditors
The district court dismissed a creditor's appeal of the denial of a jury trial in a core proceeding. The issue on appeal was the constitutionality of the bankruptcy court's authority under 28 U.S.C. § 1411, which the district court held was inapplicable
In claims litigation, the district court affirmed an order denying debtor's motion – made at trial – to amend its objection to include a set-off. The court said the motion was untimely and to grant it or to continue the trial would prejudice the creditor
