Case # | Name | Category | Court | Judge | Published |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
00-075
|
In re Lowther
Because of unusual circumstances, attorney fee award arising from child custody proceedings is dischargeable. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Sep. 4, 2001 | |
00-15128
|
In re Ellett
Court's discharge order is binding on state's attempt to collect taxes, even though state elected not to share in recovery of bankruptcy assets. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 29, 2001 | |
00-1690
|
Moldo v. Clark (In re Clark)
Trustee isn't required to object to debtor's claimed exemption when exemption claim is too ambiguous to cause property to become automatically exempt. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 27, 2001 | |
01-1007
|
Palm v. Klapperman (In re Cady)
Denial of automatic stay was proper where judgment of nondischargeability was recorded prior to property transfer. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 27, 2001 | |
99-16494
|
American Law Center PC v. Stanley (In re Jastrem)
Attorney fees for legal services provided prior to bankruptcy filing are subject to automatic stay. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 23, 2001 | |
99-55851
|
Neilson v. Chang (In re First T.D & Investment Inc.)
California statute applies to transactions between debtor and investors, therefore investors' security interests are perfected and trustee may not avoid them. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 23, 2001 | |
99-56391
|
In re Sheehan
Bankruptcy court erred in refusing to apply excusable neglect provision in determining whether to extend time for service of complaint for nondischargeability. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 23, 2001 | |
00-55464
|
Peklar v. Ikerd (In re Peklar)
Tenant's debt for having converted landlord's furniture may be discharged when she files for bankruptcy. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 20, 2001 | |
F034149
|
Great Western Bank v. Kong
Assignment of joint and several debt to one of the co-obligors extinguishes that debt. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 10, 2001 | |
00-1580
|
Nghiem v. Ghazvini (In re Nghiem)
Creditors, who orally postponed foreclosure sale during pendency of bankruptcy case, aren't required to give additional notice of sale after case dismissed. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 5, 2001 | |
00-1560
|
In re Tredinnick
Debt arising from prepetition agreement to perform postpetition legal services is nondischargeable. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 5, 2001 | |
00-1124
|
U.S. v. Klein (In re Chapman)
Government forfeiture of property for drug use is not subject to automatic stay from bankruptcy proceeding. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Aug. 5, 2001 | |
00-24405
|
In re Winkle
Colorado exemption statute doesn't preclude debtor from claiming tools of trade exemption for motor vehicles. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jul. 31, 2001 | |
99-16346
|
Rein v. Providian Financial Corp.
Debtor's later action against creditor isn't barred by res judicata when prior bankruptcy action not concluded to final judgment on merits. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jul. 25, 2001 | |
00-066
|
Watson v. Parker (In re Parker)
Legal malpractice claim against attorney debtor is dischargeable in Chapter 7 'no asset' bankruptcy. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jul. 24, 2001 | |
00-15728
|
Galam v. Carmel (Larry's Apartment L.L.C.)
Attorney fee award granted by bankruptcy court pursuant to Arizona statutes regarding sanctions and contract claims is improper. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jul. 18, 2001 | |
00-15332
|
Baldwin v. Kilpatrick (In re Baldwin)
Bankruptcy court properly gave preclusive effect to state court's default judgment. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jul. 18, 2001 | |
99-56343
|
State Bar of California v. Taggart (In re Taggart)
Attorney's debt to state bar for cost of disciplinary proceedings is compensation for actual pecuniary loss and should be discharged. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jul. 17, 2001 | |
99-55679
|
Scovis v. Henrichsen (In re Scovis)
Eligibility for Chapter 13 bankruptcy is determined by debtor's originally filed schedules so long as they were prepared in good faith. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jul. 17, 2001 | |
00-1721
|
Highland Federal Bank v. Maynard (In re. Maynard)
Creditor should be granted adequate opportunity to respond to debtor's motion to reduce valuation of property. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jul. 16, 2001 | |
00-15130
|
Harmon v. Kobrin (In re Harmon)
Summary judgment based on collateral estoppel was improper where evidence of debtor's conduct was not actually litigated in prior state court proceeding. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jul. 16, 2001 | |
B141937
|
Valencia v. Rodriguez
Dismissal of bankruptcy petition serves to validate settlement agreement entered into while automatic stay was in force. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jun. 29, 2001 | |
99-35378
|
Rifino v. U.S. (In re Rifino)
Social worker who is likely to receive salary increases is not entitled to discharge of student loan debt in bankruptcy. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jun. 28, 2001 | |
00-5108
|
Bachman v. Commercial Financial Services, Inc. (In re Commerical Financial Services, Inc.)
Lump sum cash payments due upon termination and promised when employment contracts entered into pre-petition are not entitled to administrative priority. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jun. 28, 2001 | |
00-067
|
In re Stewart (The Cadle Co. v. Stewart)
Debtor's assignment of interest in lawsuit wasn't fraudulent despite assignment's proximity to bankruptcy filing. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jun. 27, 2001 | |
99-16814
|
Contractors' State License Board of California v. Dunbar (In re Dunbar)
Federal court is authorized to review administrative law judge's decision regarding automatic stay in bankruptcy proceeding. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jun. 27, 2001 | |
99-55756
|
Dudley v. Anderson (In re Dudley)
Correct inquiry to decide whether individual retirement accounts are exempt under state statute is whether accounts were used principally for retirement purposes. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jun. 26, 2001 | |
00-1258
|
In re Miller
Automatic stay does not prohibt requests for discovery from debtor when requested for purpose of development of case against third-party. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jun. 25, 2001 | |
00-14884
|
In re Stout
Bankruptcy court doesn't approve stipulation agreement in which debtor agrees to pay stated sum and, in return, creditor dismisses adversary proceeding. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jun. 13, 2001 | |
00-070
|
In re Geneva Steel Co.
Investors holding security notes from bond issue may not avoid priority rule of distributions even in cases of fraud. |
Bankruptcy |
|
Jun. 13, 2001 |