(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Feb. 24, 2017)
The bankruptcy court denies the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in this nondischargeability action under 11 U.S.C. §§ 523(a)(2), (4), and (6). The plaintiff argued that a state court judgment collaterally estopped the debtor from defending against the claims. The court holds that the findings in the state court judgment are insufficient to prevent the debtor from asserting a defense in this action. Opinion below.
Judge: Carr
Attorney for Plaintiff: Mulvey Law LLC, Joseph L. Mulvey
(Bankr. E.D. Ky. Jan. 6, 2017)
The bankruptcy court overrules the creditor’s objection to confirmation of the Chapter 13 plan. The creditor argued its claim, secured by the debtors’ mobile home, should be increased by the cost of delivery and set-up of the home. The court holds that set-up and delivery costs may not be used as a means to increase the replacement value as a matter of law. Opinion below.
Judge: Wise
Attorney for Debtor: Daryle M. Ronning
Attorneys for Creditor: McBrayer, McGinnis, Leslie & Kirkland, Zachary A. Horn
(6th Cir. B.A.P. Nov. 7, 2016)
(7th Cir. Aug. 23, 2016)
(7th Cir. June 13, 2016)
(7th Cir. Apr. 14, 2016)
The Seventh Circuit applies Wisconsin state law and holds that a mortgage can attach a lien to a vendor’s interest in a real estate contract and that the lender perfected the lien by recording in the county land records rather than filing a UCC-1 financing statement. The trustee is unable to avoid the lien. Opinion below.
Judge: Hamilton
Attorneys for Trustee: Michael F. Dubis, Christopher R. Schultz
Attorneys for Appellees: Ruffi Law Offices, Sara Lynn Ruffi, Lund Law Office, Brad M. Lund
(7th Cir. Mar. 18, 2016)
(S.D. Ind. Feb. 5, 2016)
The district court grants the unopposed motion to withdraw the reference and the motion to dismiss the adversary proceeding with prejudice. The court discusses the standard for withdrawal motions, and finds that the standard is met here. The claims arise out of a contractual relationship outside the bankruptcy and would not be resolved through the claims resolution process. Thus, the bankruptcy court could not issue a final judgment in the matter absent the movant’s consent. Opinion below.
(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Oct. 19, 2017)
(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Aug. 21, 2017)