Fulltext Search

一、“集中管辖”概述

《中华人民共和国民事诉讼法》(下称“《民事诉讼法》”)中,对于“集中管辖”并无明确的规定,而在民事诉讼的司法实践中,存在许多被称为“集中管辖”的做法。实务中,“集中管辖”泛指将某类案件,依照《民事诉讼法》及其他法律法规的相关规定,以司法解释或者通知的形式,集中由某类法院或某个法院管辖的情形。

概括来说,“集中管辖”共分为如下三种情形:

(1)某类法院集中管辖某类案件,如依据《中华人民共和国企业破产法》(下称“《企业破产法》”)第二十一条的规定,破产案件中涉债务人的诉讼案件集中由受理破产申请的人民法院管辖,或者依据《全国法院审理债券纠纷案件座谈会纪要》(以下简称“《债券会议纪要》”)第十条的规定,以发行人或者增信机构为被告提起的要求依约偿付债券本息或者履行增信义务的合同纠纷案件,由发行人住所地人民法院管辖;

(2)某个法院集中管辖某一类型化案件,如各地金融法院集中管辖当地金融案件、各地知识产权法院集中管辖当地知识产权案件;

(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Dec. 4, 2017)

The bankruptcy court grants the motion to dismiss, finding the defendant’s security interest in the debtor’s assets, including its inventory, has priority over the plaintiff’s reclamation rights. The plaintiff sold goods to the debtor up to the petition date and sought either return of the goods delivered within the reclamation period or recovery of the proceeds from the sale of such goods. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 546(c), the Court finds the reclamation rights are subordinate and the complaint should be dismissed. Opinion below.

(Bankr. E.D. Ky. Nov. 22, 2017)

(B.A.P. 6th Cir. Nov. 28, 2017)

The Sixth Circuit B.A.P. affirms the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of the Chapter 12 bankruptcy case. The court finds that the bankruptcy court failed to give the debtor proper notice and opportunity to be heard prior to the dismissal. However, the violation of due process was harmless error. The delay in filing a confirmable plan and continuing loss to the estate warranted the dismissal. Opinion below.

Judge: Preston

Attorney for Appellant: Heather McKeever

(Bankr. W.D. Ky. Nov. 1, 2017)

The bankruptcy court grants the creditor’s motion for stay relief to proceed with a state court foreclosure action. The creditor had obtained an order granting stay relief in a prior bankruptcy filed by the debtor’s son, the owner of the property. The debtor’s life estate interest in the property does not prevent the foreclosure action from proceeding. Opinion below.

Judge: Lloyd

Attorney for Debtor: Mark H. Flener

Attorney for Creditor: Bradley S. Salyer

The Sixth Circuit affirms the B.A.P., holding the entry of summary judgment in favor of the creditors in the nondischargeability action was appropriate. The creditors obtained a default judgment against the debtor in Tennessee state court. The default judgment was on the merits and the doctrine of collateral estoppel applied. Opinion below.

Judge: Rogers

Appellant: Pro Se

Attorneys for Creditors: Keating, Muething & Klekamp, Joseph E. Lehnert, Brian P. Muething, Jason V. Stitt

(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Oct. 20, 2017)

The bankruptcy court dismisses the debtor’s complaint against the lender, which asserted claims related to the lender’s foreclosure of its mortgage lien in state court. The court dismisses the stay violation claim, because the property was not property of the estate at the time of the alleged acts, and dismisses the remaining claims because the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction. Opinion below.

Judge: Carr

Attorney for Debtor: Sawin, Shea & Des Jardines LLC, J. Andrew Sawin

(Bankr. E.D. Ky. Oct. 11, 2017)

The bankruptcy court enters judgment in favor of the Chapter 11 trustee, holding the trustee is entitled to recover approximately $280,000 in post-petition transfers and recover $40,000 in prepetition payments. The debtors repaid a post-petition loan that was not approved by the bankruptcy court and which was not in the ordinary course. The prepetition payments were preferential and the new value defense and ordinary course defenses do not apply. Opinion below.

Judge: Schaaf

Attorney for Trustee: Fowler Bell PLLC, Matthew D. Ellison