Skip to main content

Rule 4007

LeMons v. Sven (In re Sven)

Dec
13
2006
Ruling
Deadline for filing dischargeability proceeding was not equitably tolled against debtor who convicted of child pornography charges where creditor had notice but filed to file timely complaint.
Procedural posture

Appellant creditor sought review of a decision from the bankruptcy court, which denied her motion to vacate a discharge order and to extend the time to file a complaint to determine the dischargeability of her claim in debtor's chapter 7 bankruptcy.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of LeMons v. Sven (In re Sven) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

opinion summary, case decided on December 13, 2006 , LexisNexis #0207-035
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

Illinois v. Trost (In re Trost)

May
25
2006
Ruling
Debtor's motion to dismiss state's complaint was granted since complaint was untimely filed and sufficient notice had been provided.
Procedural posture

Plaintiff state of Illinois brought an adversary proceeding against defendant bankruptcy debtor asserting that debts were nondischargeable based on the state's investigation of consumer complaints against the debtor. The debtor moved to dismiss the adversary complaint on the ground that the complaint was untimely under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007(c).

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Illinois v. Trost (In re Trost) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

opinion summary, case decided on May 25, 2006 , LexisNexis #0606-105
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

Rodriguez v. Sneed (In re Sneed)

May
04
2006
Ruling
Debtor's motion to dismiss complaint as untimely was denied since creditor had timely filed within the extended period granted by the court regardless of whether it was called an objection or a complaint.
Procedural posture

Plaintiff creditor brought an adversary proceeding against defendant bankruptcy debtor seeking a declaration that a debt to the creditor was not dischargeable because it was based on intentional physical injury caused by the debtor. The debtor moved to dismiss the complaint as untimely filed under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Rodriguez v. Sneed (In re Sneed) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

opinion summary, case decided on May 04, 2006 , LexisNexis #0606-033
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

In re Sven

May
04
2006
Ruling
Motion to vacate discharge and extend time to file complaint excepting to discharge was denied since parties had been notified of deadline yet failed to timely file.
Procedural posture

Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9023 and 9024 and 11 U.S.C. § 105(a), movant victims sought to vacate debtor's chapter 7 bankruptcy discharge so that the victims could file dischargeability complaints against the debtor pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6). The victims also sought to extend the time to file a complaint excepting to discharge.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Sven Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

opinion summary, case decided on May 04, 2006 , LexisNexis #0606-070
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

Chase Bank USA N.A. v. Jay (In re Jay)

Feb
03
2006
Ruling
Creditor's dischargeability claim was dismissed since the creditor filed it after the required 60- day period.
Procedural posture

Plaintiff creditor sued defendant debtor pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 532(a)(2), seeking to except from discharge certain credit card indebtedness. The debtor moved to dismiss the complaint on the grounds that the creditor filed it after expiration of the 60-day filing period provided by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007(c).

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Chase Bank USA N.A. v. Jay (In re Jay) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

opinion summary, case decided on February 03, 2006 , LexisNexis #0306-070
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

Chattanooga Agric. Credit Assoc. v. Davis (In re Davis)

Aug
02
2005
Ruling
Consent decree was not valid for nondischargeability determination and creditor's untimely delay in filing adversary proceeding led to dismissal.
Procedural posture

Plaintiff creditor brought an adversary proceeding against defendant bankruptcy debtor seeking a declaration that a debt owed to the creditor by the debtor was not dischargeable. The debtor moved to dismiss the complaint as untimely filed under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007(c), the creditor acknowledged the untimeliness but asserted equitable estoppel and equitable tolling.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Chattanooga Agric. Credit Assoc. v. Davis (In re Davis) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

opinion summary, case decided on August 02, 2005 , LexisNexis #0106-104
LexisNexis Article
Learn More
Subscribe to %1