Search OpinionsTotal: 103
In re Bouzek, 311 B.R. 239 (June 2004) -- Judge Kelley
Wholesale (liquidation) value is the proper valuation for the redemption of collateral under Bankruptcy Code § 722.
In re Howard, 311 B.R. 230 (June 2004) -- Judge Kelley
The injunction provision of Bankruptcy Code § 109(g)(2) is permissive, rather than mandatory. See also Grossman v. Beal (In re Beal), 347 B.R. 87 (E.D. Wis. 2006).
In re Childers, 311 B.R. 232 (June 2004) -- Judge Kelley
Inability to pay does not establish the fraudulent intent necessary for the entry of a default judgment in a nondischargeability action for NSF checks.
In re Guseck, 310 B.R. 400 (May 2004) -- Judge Kelley
No need to reopen closed no-asset case to add unscheduled creditors to discharge "garden variety" debts.
In re FV Steel & Wire Co., 310 B.R. 390 (May 2004) -- Judge Kelley
Under old UCC Article 9, a financing statement listing only the debtor's trade name is "seriously misleading."
In re Harris, 310 B.R. 395 (May 2004) -- Judge Kelley
Violation of the automatic stay found when debtor’s former spouse attempted to reduce the maintenance he owed to her to compensate for her failure to pay a property division debt.
In re Wescott, 309 B.R. 308 (April 2004) -- Judge Kelley
Debtor can cure a mortgage arrearage in a Chapter 13 plan after the sheriff's sale and up until the confirmation hearing, because, under Wisconsin law, the debtor has the right to redeem the property up until the sheriff's sale is confirmed by the state court.
In re Nelson, 308 B.R. 343 (April 2004) -- Judge Kelley
Discharge injunction of Bankruptcy Code § 524(a)(3) does not apply where spouses file joint, rather than serial, cases.
In re Mikulsky, 301 B.R. 726 (December 2003) -- Judge Kelley
Collateral estoppel applies to a nondischargeability proceeding where the state court awarded punitive damages based on the debtor's malicious conduct.
In re Young, 310 B.R. 127 (November 2003) -- Judge Kelley
When a mortgage arrearage is cured under Bankruptcy Code § 1322(e), a mortgage creditor is entitled to no more than it would have received under its written agreement with the mortgagor.