Skip to main content

§ 507(a)(4)(A)

Villas of Windmill Point II Prop. Owners Ass'n, In re--Osborne v. Lesko

Apr
29
2021
Ruling
Improperly computed wage claim disallowed on trustee’s objection. (Bankr. S.D. Fla.)The Wage Claim failed as a claim under 11 U.S.C. § 507(a)(4)(A) and must be valued at zero becausedefendant director's asserted hours included time for which he was administratively adjudicated to bedisabled and therefore unable to work and the director's computations did not reflect any reductions inbilled hours for holidays, vacations, or, significantly, his own incarceration; [2]-Trustee's objection to theBonus Claim was sustained because like the Wage Claim, Severance Claim, and Delinquency Claim, itwas the product of ultra vires acts by the directors.Villas of Windmill Point II Prop. Owners Ass'n, In re--Osborne v. Lesko, 2021 Bankr. LEXIS 1144 (Bankr. S.D. Fla.April 29, 2021) (Mora, B.J.).
Issue(s)
Priorities; Order of Priorities; Wages, Salaries, or Commissions; Individual.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Villas of Windmill Point II Prop. Owners Ass'n, In re--Osborne v. Lesko Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Commercial opinion summary, case decided on April 29, 2021 , LexisNexis #0621-032
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

In re LaFrance

Sep
07
2016
Ruling
Creditor not entitled to priority claim for unpaid wages which were not earned within 180 days of the petition date.
Issue(s)
Was employee's claim for unpaid wages entitled to priority status?

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on September 07, 2016 , LexisNexis #0316-082
LexisNexis Article
Learn More

In re Aquatic Pools Inc.

May
27
2016
Ruling
Claim for wages due more than 180-days before petition date was not entitled to priority status.
Issue(s)
Was creditor's wage claim entitled to priority status?

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Aquatic Pools 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 May 27, 2016 , LexisNexis #0616-086
LexisNexis Article
Learn More
Subscribe to %1