Search Opinions
Judge Keywords
Total: 423

In re John and Christine Wilson (November 2011) -- Judge Shapiro

Chapter 7 Trustee and creditor objected to the debtor-John Wilson’s claim of exemption to a life insurance policy insuring the life of his ex-wife. The court sustained both objections and disallowed the exemption finding that debtor’s payment of $1000/mo in maintenance to ex-wife did not render her a dependent of the debtor within the meaning of Wis. Stats. § 815.18(2)(d). Further, the court found that the debtor was not a member of the class intended to be protected by Wis. Stats. § 815.18(3)(f)(2). 

In re Michelle Georgi, Case No. 11-21642, Richard Hebel v. Debtor, Adv. No. 11-2375 (November 2011) -- Judge McGarity

Chapter 7 debtor's motion to dismiss denied. Complaint of debtor's former spouse for finding of nondischargeability under sec. 523(a)(5) and/or 523(a)(15) stated claim upon which relief could be granted, despite lack of "hold harmless" agreement in parties' marital settlement agreement.

11-28921, Antoinette Maria Steward (November 2011) -- Judge Pepper

Oral ruling on creditor/landlord's motion to have its claim for the debtor's post-petition missed rent payments classified as an administrative priority claim.  The debtor's original plan had proposed to assume the lease.  Before the Court confirmed that plan, the creditor obtained relief from stay to evict the debtor.  The debtor amended the plan to reject the lease, the creditor did not object, and the Court confirmed that plan.  The Court found that the debtor never officially assumed the lease, because it was confirmation of the plan that solidified the debtor's proposed assumption or rejection.  The Court found that because the debtor had not assumed the lease pre-petition, the post-petition rejection did not constitute a breach of the lease contract under section 365(g)(1), and therefore that the missed lease payments were to be characterized as a pre-petition, general, unsecured, non-priority debt.

In re Richard VanDynHoven, Case No. 10-28421, The Bank of Kaukauna v. Debtor, Adv. No. 10-2474 (November 2011) -- Judge McGarity

Bank's claim arising for IRS and Dept. of Revenue overdrafts was nondischargeable under sec. 523(a)(14) and (a)(14A) because the overdrafts were debts incurred to satisfy tax obligations that would have been nondischargeable if they had not been honored.

In re Patricia A. McClellan, Case No. 05-44803, William T. Neary, UST v. Debtor, Adv. No. 07-2141 (October 2011) -- Judge McGarity

United States Trustee's motion pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a) for correction of error in order denying debtor's discharge was granted.  The order improperly denying the discharge under sec. 727(a)(8), instead of section 727(a)(2), was a clerical error, not a legal error.

In re Ronald & Sandra Anderson, Case No. 11-22650 (September 2011) -- Judge McGarity

Chapter 13 debtors with no personal liability on accelerated loan on principal residence were not allowed to strip the mortgage down to the value of the real estate.

11-20664, Thomas and Amy Pfister (September 2011) -- Judge Pepper

Court's oral ruling granting the United States Trustee's motion to dismiss under section 707(b)(3)(B) on the totality of the circumstances.

In re David & Laurie Mathe, Case No. 10-38356, Craig & Jeanne Bell v. Debtors, Adv. No. 11-2190 (September 2011) -- Judge McGarity

Summary judgment pursuant to doctrine of issue preclusion was not warranted because state court findings did not meet nondischargeability standards set forth in sections 523(a)(2)(A) and (a)(4).

In re Weise, 455 B.R. 702 (September 2011) -- Judge Kelley

In Chapter 13 case, junior lienholder’s secured status is not affected by the senior lienholder’s failure to file a claim within 90 days of the § 341 meeting of creditors.

In re Martin & Katherine Murray, Case No. 10-31824, M&I Marshall & Ilsley Bank v. Martin Murray v. M&S Automotive, LLC, and Shaun Buckett, Adv. No. 10-2482 (September 2011) -- Judge McGarity

Court abstained from hearing third party complaint for indemnification after plaintiff and defendant stipulated for dismissal of first party cause of action.

8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 12 of 43