Skip to main content

Page Banner(Taxonomy)

judge williams

Myers v. Miracle Finance Inc. (In re Myers)

Ruling
Failure to halt garnishment process was a willful violation of stay.
Procedural posture

Debtor sought a determination that creditor willfully violated the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C.S. § 362(a) by failing to stay a process of garnishment. Both parties filed motions for summary judgment.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Myers v. Miracle Finance Inc. (In re Myers) 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 06, 2009 , LexisNexis #0509-039

Newton v. ACC of Enter. (In re Newton)

Ruling
Debtors could not bring private right of action for improper disclosure of social security numbers on proofs of claim.
Procedural posture

Debtors brought adversary proceedings seeking relief predicated on the disclosure of their unredacted social security numbers in the proofs of claim filed by defendants creditors. The creditors moved to dismiss the complaints for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, under Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012(b).

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on January 29, 2009 , LexisNexis #0409-001

In re Radetic

Ruling
Bankruptcy court voluntarily abstained from hearing contract dispute related to debtor's bankruptcy.
Procedural posture

Creditor filed a motion for relief from the automatic stay to proceed against the debtor in a state court action filed prepetition. The action arose from a failed real estate contract. The creditor, as listing agent, sought a commission from the debtor. The stay motion in effect called on the bankruptcy court to abstain from determining the breach of contract dispute.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on January 16, 2009 , LexisNexis #0309-024

In re White

Ruling
Debtor could not reclassify claim secured by "910 vehicle" through modification of confirmed plan.
Procedural posture

A debtor filed for relief under chapter 13 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, and a plan was confirmed. The debtor filed a motion to modify her confirmed plan. The confirmed plan provided for the surrender of a vehicle secured by a creditor, with leave for the creditor to file a deficiency claim after disposition of the collateral. The creditor filed an objection to the modified plan.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on November 25, 2008 , LexisNexis #0109-064

In re Carlton

Ruling
Inclusion of negative equity in "910 vehicle" loan did not affect purchase money status or protection from bifurcation.
Procedural posture

The debtors filed for relief under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code and filed a proposed chapter 13 plan. A creditor objected to confirmation of the plan because the plan bifurcated the creditor's claim into secured and unsecured components.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on November 24, 2008 , LexisNexis #0309-021

In re Holland

Ruling
Ruling that state law applied to determine debtor's entitlement to exemption was not a final appealable order.
Procedural posture

Appellant bankruptcy trustee challenged an order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, holding that Florida law applied in determining whether appellee debtor's property was exempt from her bankruptcy estate and remanding the matter to the bankruptcy court.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Holland 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
Consumer opinion summary, case decided on August 19, 2008 , LexisNexis #0908-017

Munding v. LeMaster & Daniels P.L.L.C. (In re Spokane Raceway Park Inc.)

Ruling
Bankruptcy court voluntarily abstained from hearing indemnity action against third party already pending in state court.
Procedural posture

Plaintiff chapter 11 trustee filed an adversary proceeding against defendant accounting firm, seeking a judgment determining the validity of a claim the firm filed against a corporate debtor's bankruptcy estate. The firm filed a third-party action against third-party defendant Washington limited partnership, claiming that the partnership had an obligation to indemnify it against any judgment the trustee obtained. The partnership moved to dismiss.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Munding v. LeMaster & Daniels P.L.L.C. (In re Spokane Raceway Park 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 July 09, 2008 , LexisNexis #0908-093

In re Griffin

Ruling
Domestic support obligations being collected by state were priority claims that were required to be paid in full during term of plan.
Procedural posture

A debtor filed for relief under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code, and submitted a proposed plan. The Alabama Department of Human Resources (DHR) objected to the confirmation of the proposed plan, claiming that pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 507, the DHR's priority claims needed to be paid in full during the term of the plan.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 30, 2008 , LexisNexis #0708-089

Moore v. Alabama Power Co. (In re Moore)

Ruling
Continued wage garnishement by garnishee was not a violation of codebtor stay by creditor that obtained the original prepetition writ.
Procedural posture

Defendant creditor filed a motion, pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012(b)(6), to dismiss the adversary proceeding of plaintiffs, a debtor and her cosigner, for damages for an alleged violation of the codebtor stay imposed by 11 U.S.C.S. § 1301(a) and to hold the creditor in contempt under 11 U.S.C.S. § 105.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 28, 2008 , LexisNexis #0708-088

In re Camp

Ruling
Debtor's counsel not entitled to administrative expense claim for fees incurred prior to petition date.
Procedural posture

Counsel filed an application, pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 327 and 330, for nunc pro tunc approval of his employment as an attorney for the bankruptcy estate and for compensation for services rendered. Counsel also contended that if the application was approved, he would be entitled to priority status as an administrative claim under 11 U.S.C.S. § 503(b)(1).

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 08, 2008 , LexisNexis #0808-043