Skip to main content

§ 1334

SunEdison, Inc., In re

Jun
16
2017
Ruling
Motion for examination regarding a sale agreement denied for debtors' failure to demonstratethat the discovery they sought was needed to accomplish the purposes they had identified.(Bankr. S.D.N.Y.)
Issue(s)
Bankruptcy Cases and Proceedings; Proceedings Arising Under or Arising In or Related to Cases Under Title 11.

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

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on June 16, 2017 , LexisNexis #0717-085
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

ATP Oil & Gas Corp., In re--Bennu Oil & Gas, LLC v. Bluewater Indus., L.P.

Jun
15
2017
Ruling
District courts have subject matter jurisdiction over all title 11 civil proceedings and theirrelated cases. (Bankr. S.D. Tex.)
Issue(s)
Bankruptcy Cases and Proceedings; Proceedings Arising Under or Arising In or Related to Cases Under Title 11.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of ATP Oil & Gas Corp., In re--Bennu Oil & Gas, LLC v. Bluewater Indus., L.P. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on June 15, 2017 , LexisNexis #0717-084
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

In re W.R. Grace & Co.

Dec
28
2016
Ruling
Creditor not entitled to alllowance of a proof of claim as seven years has already passed sincethe bar date. (Bankr. D. Del.)
Issue(s)
Bankruptcy Cases and Proceedings; Abstention; Mandatory Abstention.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re W.R. Grace & Co. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on December 28, 2016 , LexisNexis #0117-118
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

Ashland Inc. v. G-I Holdings Inc. (In re G-I Holdings, Inc.)

Dec
21
2016
Ruling
Mandatory abstention required as action could be timely adjudicated in state court. (Bankr.D.N.J.)
Issue(s)
Bankruptcy Cases and Proceedings; Abstention; Mandatory Abstention.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Ashland Inc. v. G-I Holdings Inc. (In re G-I Holdings, Inc.) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on December 21, 2016 , LexisNexis #0117-117
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

Exeter Holding Ltd. v. AFC Real Estate LLC (In re Exeter Holding Ltd.)

Mar
14
2013
Ruling
Bankruptcy court abstained from hearing proceeding against title insurance company based on state law claims and not closely related to bankruptcy.
Procedural posture

Title insurance company filed a motion seeking mandatory and permissive abstention under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1334(c), (d), and remand pursuant to 28 U.S.C.S. § 1452(b) of an adversary proceeding. The court also sua sponte raised whether abstention and remand were appropriate in three other adversary proceedings.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Exeter Holding Ltd. v. AFC Real Estate LLC (In re Exeter Holding Ltd.) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on March 14, 2013 , LexisNexis #0413-103
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

Brown v. Kondaur Capital Corp. (In re Brown)

Mar
14
2013
Ruling
Bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction over postdischarge proceeding to determine validity of lien on abandoned property.
Procedural posture

In this adversary action, chapter 7 debtor and his non-filing spouse asked the court to find that none of the defendants held a valid lien against their real property. Defendant, the current holder of the mortgage, requested that the court abstain under 28 U.S.C.S. § 1334(c), dismiss.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on March 14, 2013 , LexisNexis #0413-104
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

Stoe v. Flaherty

Jan
23
2006
Ruling
Court ruled that mandatory abstention applied to cases removed to federal court including the case of a former officer for unpaid severance benefits since the case was related to but did not arise in a bankruptcy case, did not arise under the Code, and was started in state court.
Procedural posture

Plaintiff former officer sought review of a decision of the district court, which denied the officer's motion for mandatory abstention under 28 U.S.C. § 1334 after defendants, current and former officers of the officer's former employer, removed the officer's action for unpaid severance benefits to federal court. Defendants were also ultimately successful on the merits of the case.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Stoe v. Flaherty Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Court :
Judge or Jurisdiction information not available
opinion summary, case decided on January 23, 2006 , LexisNexis #0206-023
LexisNexis Article
Learn More
Subscribe to %1