§ 546(a)(2)

Santiago Rodriguez, In re--Santiago Rodriguez v. Martinez

Ruling: 
Avoidance of preferential transfer was time barred as the debtors had actual knowledge of alleged preferential transfer no later than 19 days before the closing of their case but failed to bring an avoidance action at that time. (Bankr. D.P.R.)
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Santiago Rodriguez, In re--Santiago Rodriguez v. Martinez. 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 June 08,2017, LexisNexis #0717-049

Mullen v. Kalil (In re Mullen)

Plaintiff debtor sued defendant former husband alleging that the transfers of a lease and a business were avoidable as fraudulent transfers under 11 U.S.C. § 548, the transfers of the lease and the business were avoidable under 11 U.S.C. § 544(b), and the transfers of the lease and the business were avoidable preferences under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b). The former husband filed a motion for summary judgment.
Ruling: 
Debtor's action to avoid transfers to the debtor's former husband was time barred since the action was already disclosed in the debtor's discharged chapter 7 case and could not be revived by reopening the case and converting to chapter 11.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Mullen v. Kalil (In re Mullen). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Subscribe to § 546(a)(2)