, Debtor James Bruce Preece appeals from the Bankruptcy Court's[1] Judgments that his debts, to Ken Schoenfelder, Blue Skies, Inc., and Central Boiler, Inc. are nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A)., HFI was unable to sell Stanger's helicopter under the listing agreement.
In Broken Bow Ranch, the debtor appealed a bankruptcy court *658 order which denied the debtor discharge in a chapter 12 plan unless the debtor paid all of its disposable income to its unsecured creditors.
, Capital One argues that the hanging paragraph does not apply because § 506(a) was not applicable to claims determined in cases where the plan provided for surrender of the vehicle under § 1325(a)(5)(C) of the Code as it existed prior to BAPCPA. Credit Union v. Zehrung (In re Zehrung), 351 B.R.
, Filed: March 30, 2007.CONCLUSION, For the reasons stated above, the bankruptcy court did not err in finding that the funds that the Debtor deposited in the § 529 tuition savings accounts for his children are property of his bankruptcy estate and are not subject to any applicable exemption.
Robert Terry; The bankruptcy court denied the Liquidating Trust's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction as moot., The defendants argue that GAF's complaint is related to the Farmland bankruptcy because it implicates the bankruptcy court's orders approving the sale.
They admit that they have not paid any income taxes from 1983 through 2003, nor have they filed federal or state income tax returns, even though they earned income in those years.[2] Thus, they assert, any such claims, if valid, were discharged in their bankruptcy case.
These documents include several default notices sent to Prime, RCS and Dahlke on loans executed by the Partnerships and several non-sufficient funds notices sent from Nebraska State Bank to Prime (collectively the Default Notices). Trustee filed a timely notice of appeal and this appeal follows.
In contrast to the Form 22C numbers, the schedules filed with the petition show a lower average monthly income and much lower average monthly expenses, with the result that the debtor has an actual monthly surplus of $600 with which to make plan payments. BAPCPA added § 1129(a)(15) to Title 11.
, United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Eighth Circuit., Debtors Bobby Ernest Finch and Donna Lynn Finch appeal from the Order of the Bankruptcy Court[1] denying their Motion to Reopen their Chapter 13 Case and denying their Applications to Proceed without Prepayment of Fees.
, Filed: May 31, 2007. When the bankruptcy court has determined the plaintiffs' claims against all of the other defendants in this adversary proceeding, it will enter a judgment incorporating the relief granted to the various parties, including the relief granted in its April 23, 2007 order.
, Benjamin L. Eagle (Debtor) appeals from two bankruptcy court[1] orders.ISSUES, The first issue on appeal is whether the bankruptcy court erred in sustaining the Creditor's objection to the Debtor's homestead exemptions in certain real property which the Debtor transferred prepetition.
DeWitt Bank Trust Company; Also on November 20, 2006, the Morgan judge entered an Order directing Ms. Goldman to show cause why she should not be removed as trustee in the Morgan case only, due to what the Morgan judge perceived to be false testimony at the November 7 hearing., THE COURT: Okay.
, Jones contacted Valley Food's attorney in a letter dated June 1, 2006. Schoenhofer first argued that because the bankruptcy court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the claims contained in the Adversary Complaint, the Default Judgment was a void judgment under Rule 60(b)(4).
However, MAD is only entitled to those proceeds , In the Affidavit he submitted to the Bankruptcy Court in support of his objection to MASI's claim, the MAD Trustee stated that he dissolved the other subsidiaries in accordance with § 10-19.1-110 of *412 the North Dakota statutes.
, After extensive questioning by the bankruptcy court, Trustee's attorney stated that Debtor's estate would realize $26, 000 in equity with respect to the liens on the North Dakota property and $52, 000.00 from the Minnesota property after paying Stenerson $40, 000.00 of the sale proceeds.
, Filed: November 5, 2007. In ruling on Regency's motion to dismiss the adversary, the bankruptcy court based its decision on the proposition that Regency did not violate the automatic stay because its repossession of the vehicle was authorized by the court order granting relief. 107 F.3d at 977.
, The debtor appeals the bankruptcy court's[1] order which granted Chase Home Finance's motion for relief from the automatic stay and the trustee's motion to approve a settlement with Chase., On October 2006, the court held a hearing on. DeBold v. Case, 452 F.3d 756, 761 (8th Cir.2006);
both loans. On that issue, TILA requires that the notice to the consumer clearly and conspicuously disclose the following:, (i) The retention or acquisition of a security interest in the consumer's principal dwelling., 459 F.3d 837, 842 (8th Cir.2006) (citing Household Credit Servs.
However, the Trustee's actual knowledge of the property is irrelevant under § 544, so not only does this argument fail, but the revelation that lots in Minnesota may be designated by numbers or letters precludes a finding that Household's mortgage is facially defective.
And the bankruptcy court in Havens Steel Co., did not actually discuss the basis for its determination that the buyer in that case had constructive possession of the steel, although it ultimately found that constructive possession satisfies the BIOC possession requirement.
