Robert argues that Grace's appeal from the bankruptcy court's order approving the postconfirmation plan modification became moot when the court granted Robert a discharge in bankruptcy, as required under Code Section 1328, after he completed making all of his payments under the modified plan.
(citing cases)., Accordingly, we conclude that Greenwood's practice of sending a copy of a proposed reaffirmation agreement directly to the debtor is an attempt to collect a debt and, we affirm the bankruptcy court's determination that the practice violated Iowa Code § 537.7103(5)(e).
, James D. Luedtke, St. Paul, MN, pro se., As a result, because Luedtke's notice of appeal was untimely, and because he did not request an extension of time for filing the notice of appeal from the bankruptcy court under Rule 8002(c), [2] we lack subject matter jurisdiction over his appeal.
, KOGER, Chief Judge. If, after conducting the hearing, the bankruptcy court is still of the opinion that Nelson is not entitled to the additional compensation, it should enter findings and conclusions so that, if appealed again, a reviewing *398 court can determine the bases for that decision.
397, 11 L. Ed. 2d 404 (1964);, [8] In fact, under the bankruptcy court's procedure, where an un-entered copy of the order was to be served on the parties, appellant was required to contact the clerk to ascertain the entry date and thereby ascertain the last date for filing an appeal.
, The debtor, Ramona Moix-McNutt, appeals another interlocutory order of the bankruptcy court, [2] this one denying her motion for recusal.DISCUSSION, 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1) confers jurisdiction on bankruptcy appellate panels to hear appeals from final judgments, orders, and decrees. Ouachita Nat.
Specifically, the Bankruptcy Court indicated that Connelly Group could be an immediate or mediate transferee of the initial transferee such that summary judgment was inappropriate. The Connelly Group now seeks leave to appeal this ruling. [T]o delay the trial will prejudice its case .
953 (1997), In re Ramona MOIX-McNUTT, Debtor. One of the appellees, Mercantile Bank, has filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that the bankruptcy court's order is not a final judgment, order or decree within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1) (1994).
The Court concludes that Mr. Bryan had adequate notice of the Lands' bankruptcy.Sharon Bryan did not testify at the hearing on the motion to change venue and motion to set aside the confirmation order, and Dan Bryan did not testify that he told his wife about the Lands' bankruptcy filing.
, SCOTT, Bankruptcy Judge.*202 IV, The bankruptcy court's determination that Hartford failed to show excusable neglect with regard to Hartford's motion to extend the time for filing a Notice of Appeal under Rule 8002, Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure was not clearly erroneous.
Brown v. Ramsay (In re Ragar), 3 F.3d at 1179; We therefore conclude that the bankruptcy court had jurisdiction., [11] The court's original contempt order imposed sanctions against Koehler in the amount of $11, 534.50, including $1, 750 in fees and expenses for Grant's attorney, Erlene Krigel.
v., Judith Ann WEBB, Appellant. The debtor appeals this judgment, pointing to no specific error in the trial court's findings, but, rather, asserts that the bankruptcy court should have advised her what other documents she was required to produce in order to defend the section 727(a) action.
, Are the Debts Contingent There, the court contrasted the unliquidated nature of tort claims with the liquidated nature of contract claims and held that a disputed contract liability was liquidated even though adjudication of the debt required submission of evidence at trial.
, The debtor, Caryn Merrifield, appeals an order of the bankruptcy court[1] denying her request to avoid a pre-petition transfer pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548. Section 548 of the Bankruptcy Code expressly confers avoidance powers on trustees. McGuirl v. White, 86 F.3d 1232, 1234 (D.C.Cir.1996);
, The bankruptcy court determined that Debtor made some false statements and did not use the proceeds of one of the loans to purchase a van, as Debtor had represented he would. 1504, 1511, 84 L. Ed. 2d 518 (1985) (quoting U.S. v. U.S. Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395, 68 S. Ct.
Accordingly, the bankruptcy court held that the Debtor failed to establish by any credible evidence, that the Trustee would be able to effect recovery in excess of the proffered settlement of $10, 500.00 together with elimination of Goodstein's claims against the estate.
Citizens Bank Trust Co. v. Case (In re Case), 937 F.2d 1014, 1018 (5th Cir.1991) (Our review of the bankruptcy court's decision to reopen an estate or proceeding is governed by the abuse of discretion standard., [5] In a voluntary case, the filing of a petition also acts as the order for relief.
She purchased an investment to which she alone contributed. The Eighth Circuit disallowed the debtor's exemption, stating that Iowa Code § 627.6(8)(e) provides exemptions only for payments: In § 627.6(8)(e), the Iowa Legislature has limited its exemption to `rights in' an annuity payment.
[2] The bankruptcy court ordered Appellant to pay Debtor's spouse, Appellee Nichola DeLaughter, the attorneys' fees and expenses she had incurred in responding to Debtor's amended Chapter 13 plan filed in the bankruptcy case., Appellee then filed a motion for sanctions under Bankruptcy Rule 9011.
, United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Eighth Circuit. The court further noted that the Debtor's obligation to support his children was not limited by the language in the Settlement Agreement restricting the amount of maintenance that Pamela might later obtain. Allen, 118 F.3d at 1294.
