Adkins, In re--Quality Car & Truck Leasing, Inc. v. Adkins

Debtor's discharge was denied where creditor has shown that debtor possessed livestock andequipment at filing and as there was no discharge entered, creditor also showed theunexplained loss of those assets prior to discharge. (Bankr. S.D. W. Va.)HOLDINGS; [1]-Creditor was not entitled to summary judgment on its 11 U.S.C.S. § 727(a)(2)(B) claim, asit provided insufficient proof that any transfers of its collateral -- equipment or livestock -- were made afterthe filing date of the petition; [2]-Creditor made the requisite showing under § 727(a)(5), as debtoracknowledged on his schedules that he owned livestock and equipment at filing and, because no dischargewas entered, creditor showed the unexplained loss of those assets prior to discharge; [3]-Debtor's claim thatthe collateral was taken or sold by another creditor was a fantastical assertion, as livestock and farmequipment were not small possessions that could easily be removed without his knowledge; [4]-Assertionthat he had no idea where the equipment or cattle went was simply incredible and did not rise to the levelof the showing required to defeat summary judgment.Adkins, In re--Quality Car & Truck Leasing, Inc. v. Adkins, 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 4099 (Bankr. S.D. W. Va. December 1, 2017) (Volk, C.B.J.).
Discharge; Grounds for Denial; Failure to Explain Losses.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Adkins, In re--Quality Car & Truck Leasing, Inc. v. Adkins. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on December 01,2017, LexisNexis #0118-027