The district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's order granting relief from the stay, finding that the secured creditor was not adequately protected and the debtor had not been able to establish a realistic prospect of a successful reorganization

The distribution agreement between debtor & the defendant was an executory contract to be assumed or rejected by the trustee. On the petition date, neither side had received a contractual benefit & both sides had substantial future duties to perform

Other than the disputed debt of the petitioning creditor in this involuntary bankruptcy case, the evidence showed that the debtor was generally meeting his obligations to creditors, so the case was dismissed because it didn't meet section 303(h)(1)

On appeal, the district court reversed the bankruptcy court, finding the admin. expenses incurred – including penalties & interest on payroll taxes – benefitted the secured creditor and should be paid from the proceeds of the creditor's collateral

Report and recommendation from magistrate judge recommending affirmance of the bankruptcy court's order of Sept. 11, 1980, granting defendants' motion for summary judgment and refusing to grant relief from the stay to pursue a state-court lawsuit

On appeal, the district court affirmed an order granting relief from the stay for cause to a creditor whose interest was not adequately protected. The debtors had no equity in the property and did not show its necessity for an effective reorganization

On a motion for summary judgment, the district court found that the injuries caused by the debtor as a result of driving while intoxicated met the "willful and malicious" standard of § 523(a)(6) and rendered the debt to plaintiff non-dischargeable

The court approved fee application for attorney fees of creditors who filed an involuntary petition against the debtor. The court overruled the debtor's objection, noting that the fees would have been lower had the debtor not resisted the petition

Younker's wanted a debt excepted from discharge under sec. 523(a)(2), believing debtor went on a spending spree with his charge card in anticipation of bankruptcy & incurred charges with no intent to pay them. The court found no such evidence of intent

The debt at issue is non-dischargeable because debtor obtained the loan using false pretenses/false representations in order to use the proceeds from plaintiff to clear his financial difficulties with another creditor, contrary to what he told plaintiff