385 B.R. 800 (2008), IN RE MELCHER;, MELCHER, v., ESTATE OF MELCHER., No. NC-05-01343-KRyB, 06-16412., United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit., April 30, 2008., Decision without published opinion. Affirmed.
385 B.R. 800 (2008), IN RE PLANTICA LANDSCAPE CORP.;, CAVANAGH, v., PEOPLE OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA., No. CC-05-01245-PaBK, 06-56540., United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit., May 6, 2008., Decision without published opinion. Dismissed.
210 (2008), IN RE COOL FUEL, INC., COOL FUEL, INC., v., BOARD OF EQUALIZATION OF STATE OF CALIFORNIA., United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit.
385 B.R. 800 (2008), IN RE ZAMOS;, ZAMOS, v., ZAMOS., No. CC-05-01043-Ma-MoB, CC-05-01361-Ma-MoB, 06-55595., United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the Ninth Circuit., February 12, 2008., Decision without published opinion. Affirmed.
[6], In finding that a portion of Americredit's claim was still secured by a purchase money security interest, the bankruptcy court rejected Penrod's assertion that the Transformation Rule rendered the entire security interest nonpurchase money. The term includes consumer-goods transactions.
Accordingly, the bankruptcy court correctly ruled that no automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 362 arose as to [Wong] upon the filing of the [third bankruptcy] case on August 31, 2007, and that no stay is now in effect, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 362(c)(4)(A)(ii).
ISSUES, 1. For the reasons set forth in Part V, we agree with Trustee that as a matter of law, the bankruptcy court should have entered summary judgment declaring that all of the Trust corpus (including the Ermatinger Third) is property of Debtor's estate.pursuant to section 544(a)(3)
Rule 3007. While the proof of claim may have been based on a debt that debtor did not owe, it does not logically follow that whenever a debt collector files a proof *245 of claim in bankruptcy proceedings that this constitutes an unlawful attempt to collect a debt in violation of FDCPA § 1692f.
The perfection was complete eight days before the debtors' bankruptcy filing, thus bringing it within the 90-day preference period., After the bankruptcy court found it could avoid the debtors' transfer of a perfected security interest to USAA, it turned to the appropriate remedy., Inc., 525 F.3d.
OPINION, KLEIN, Bankruptcy Judge:, Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8001(e) requires that a separate writing be used to make an election under 28 U.S.C. § 158(c)(1) to have a bankruptcy appeal heard by the district court instead of the bankruptcy appellate panel.Issues, 1.
, Hickman filed a motion to dismiss the chapter 7 case on September 20, 2007, asserting that his preference for jury trial in the Hana dispute provided cause to dismiss under § 707(a) so that a jury trial could be heard in state court.
CSC was a wholly-owned subsidiary of CMC., Based on the record before us, we conclude that the bankruptcy court did not err in finding that NetBank did not perfect its security interest in the lease payments by filing a financing statement or by taking possession of the leases through Royal.
Section 521(a)(2), The BAPCPA amendments to section 521(a)(2) do not by themselves affect the Parker decision.[19], Here, the repossession took place after the petition was filed (and after discharge), thus any state law claim Dumont may have against Ford would not be property of the estate.
Leonard v. Maverick Helicopters, Inc., Adv. Zurich Am. Thus, W. E's knowledge of a dispositive motion prior to the sale of debtor's flight allocations sufficed as notice that the court might vacate the dismissal order and restore the parties to the positions they occupied before the dismissal.
v., State Bar of California, Appellee. PROF.CODE) § 6086.10 designating attorney discipline cost awards as penalties legislatively reversed the result of the Ninth Circuit decision in State Bar v. Taggart (In re Taggart), 249 F.3d 987 (9th Cir.2001). $406.80, cost of certifying court documents;
Debtors, following the format and instructions of Official Bankruptcy Form 22C[2] (Form 22C), deducted business expenses from Warren Wiegand's self-employed income, which resulted in below-median income entitling debtors to a thirty-six month applicable commitment period.
The Second Circuit held that the restitution obligation was a debt for purposes of the Bankruptcy Code and was not excepted from the debtor's discharge under § 523(a)(7) because under Connecticut law, restitution was assessed for the loss or damage caused [by the crime]. 353, 93 L. Ed. 2d 216...
ORDER, KLEIN, Bankruptcy Judge.A, The boundary marker is the docketing of the appeal that occurs under Rule 8007(b) when the bankruptcy court clerk transmits the appellate record and transcripts to the bankruptcy appellate panel or district court:, (b) Duty of Clerk to Transmit Copy of Record;
, The trustee filed a motion to find the debtor in civil contempt, to order her to appear for the 2004 examination and produce documents, and to impose monetary sanctions on the debtor., Rule 9020 provides that motions for contempt in bankruptcy cases are contested matters governed by Rule 9014.
1212, the Supreme Court held that the fraud exception to discharge contained in section 523(a)(2)(A) prohibit[s] the discharge of any liability arising from a debtor's fraudulent acquisition of money, property, etc., including an award of treble damages for the fraud.
