2094 search results for query

Citation: 304 B.R. 695 | Docket No.: 19-11557
Status: Published | Citing: 76
Summary: 304 B.R. 695 (2003) In re Josephine DANIELS, Debtor. Josephine Daniels, Plaintiff, v. County of Chester, Tax Claims Bureau, Leslie K. Bair, Director and Astro Group, LLC, Defendants. July 16, 2003. Introduction The Debtor filed this adversary proceeding to void a tax sale of her home. The parties submitted briefs and argued their points at a hearing on May 6, 2003. 2 Moore's supra, § 12.30[5]; see Robinson v. Overseas Military Sales Corp., 21 F.3d 502, 507 (2d Cir.1994) (burden of proving more.

Citation: 309 B.R. 130 | Docket No.: 14-17127
Status: Published | Citing: 25
Summary: 309 B.R. 130 (2004) In re David BURRY, Debtor. Gloria M. Satriale, Chapter 7 Trustee for the Estate of David Burry, Plaintiff, v. Key Bank USA, N.A., Defendant. Factual Background The Trustee has sued Key Bank USA, (the Bank) to recover certain payments received from the Debtor as fraudulent transfers[1]. Although the Debtor is not a borrower on the loan, the Bank maintains it was agreed between the borrower (Stillman) and the Debtor that they would share the boat and split the payments, as more.

Citation: 121 B.R. 942 | Docket No.: 19-11155
Status: Published | Citing: 65
Summary: 121 B.R. 942 (1990) In re CS ASSOCIATES d/b/a University Nursing and Rehabilitation Center, Debtor. UNITED JERSEY BANK, Indenture Trustee, Plaintiff, v. CS ASSOCIATES d/b/a University Nursing and Rehabilitation Center; The Philadelphia Authority for Industrial Development; Pennsylvania Millers Mutual Insurance Company; and Mitchell W. Miller, Trustee, Defendants. A. INTRODUCTION We herein decide two matters related to the above entitled case, both of which were initiated by UNITED JERSEY BANK (" more.

Citation: 5 B.R. 464 | Docket No.: 19-11226
Status: Published | Citing: 5
Summary: 5 B.R. 464 (1980) In re MEADE LAND AND DEVELOPMENT CO., INC. Presently before the court is an application for allowance of accumulated interest on the balance of fees remaining to be paid to counsel for the receiver and trustee in a Chapter XI proceeding.The issue before the court is whether counsel is entitled to interest that has accrued on the balance of their award of counsel fees not yet paid from the date of such allowance by the bankruptcy court.

Citation: 445 B.R. 467 | Docket No.: 19-11766
Status: Published | Citing: 17
Summary: 445 B.R. 467 (2010) In re Scott W. SEGEN, Debtor. (3) Property listed in this paragraph is— (A) subject to subsections (o) and (p) any property that is exempt under Federal law, other than subsection (d) of this section, or State or local law that is applicable on the date of the filing of the petition at the place in which the debtor's domicile has been located for the 730 days immediately preceding the date of the filing of the petition ... (B) any interest in property in which the debtor had, more.

Citation: 17 B.R. 278 | Docket No.: 19-10871
Status: Published | Citing: 1
Summary: 17 B.R. 278 (1982) In re Dwight D. SHEPHERD, Gail J. Shepherd, h/w, Debtors. *279 Virginia A. Lowe, Legal Aid of Chester County, Inc., West Chester, Pa., for debtors, Dwight D. Shepherd and Gail J. Shepherd.

Citation: 371 B.R. 102 | Docket No.: 19-11258
Status: Published | Citing: 33
Summary: 371 B.R. 102 (2007) In re Ralph Eugene WILLIAMS and Denice Louise Shippen, Debtors. Before the Court is the Motion for Relief from Stay (the "Motion") of AGLF Investments, LLC ("AGLF"), seeking to recover possession of real property leased to the Debtors for their residence (the "Residence"). Debtors rent their Residence from AGLF pursuant to a lease dated January 15, 2007 (the "Lease"). On March 2, 2007, AGLF filed a Landlord and Tenant Complaint[1] against Debtors for past-due rent in the more.

Citation: 376 B.R. 473 | Docket No.: 19-10821
Status: Published | Citing: 28
Summary: 376 B.R. 473 (2007) In re Theodore D. PENDERGRASS, II, Debtor. Samuel Dalembert, Plaintiff, v. Theodore D. Pendergrass, II, Defendant. Before the Court is the Motion of Debtor/Defendant ("Debtor") to Dismiss the above-captioned adversary action (the "Motion"). On April 9, 2007, Plaintiff's counsel attempted to file an objection to confirmation of Debtor's Chapter 13 plan, but failed to follow the Court's electronic filing requirements. The Notice stated that the deadline to file a complaint more.

Citation: 395 B.R. 330 | Docket No.: 11-17983
Status: Published | Citing: 46
Summary: 395 B.R. 330 (2008) In re Abdul H. JABARIN, Debtor. I. On January 14, 2007, Abdul H. Jabarin ("the Debtor") filed a petition under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. [1] Subsequently, I determined that resolution of the Motion necessitated the development of an evidentiary record and by Order dated July 15, 2008, scheduled an evidentiary hearing for August 27, 2008. The Debtor answered "None" in response to ¶ 10 of the SOFA, which requests that the Debtor: List all other property, other than more.

Citation: 43 B.R. 396 | Docket No.: 19-10469
Status: Published | Citing: 2
Summary: 43 B.R. 396 (1984) In re Nancy L. VEASEY, Debtor. The facts of this case are as follows:[1] On September 11, 1981, Nancy L. Veasey ("the debtor") gave a mortgage on her property to the Philadelphia Saving Fund Society ("the mortgagee") to secure a loan in the amount of $12,687.52.

Citation: 39 B.R. 768 | Docket No.: 19-11655
Status: Published | Citing: 25
Summary: 39 B.R. 768 (1984) In re BIBLE DELIVERANCE EVANGELISTIC CHURCH, Debtor. SUMMARY First Application Date of services March 29-July 31, 1983 Hours 169.1 Costs $767.99 Fee at standard billing rates $17,148.50 Bonus compensation 16,671.50 Total Fee $ more.

Citation: 86 B.R. 51 | Docket No.: 19-11769
Status: Published | Citing: 37
Summary: 86 B.R. 51 (1988) In re MORYSVILLE BODY WORKS, INC., Debtor. The Small Business Administration ("SBA") presses this motion for relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(d)(1), § 362(d)(2)(A) and § 362(d)(2)(B) against Morysville Body Works, Inc. ("debtor"), an entity which received a $250,000 second mortgage loan now held by the SBA[1]. Considering the evidentiary burdens in this case, we find that the Debtor has equity in its real property, and that the existing "equity more.

Citation: 387 B.R. 128 | Docket No.: 19-10105
Status: Published | Citing: 81
Summary: 387 B.R. 128 (2008) In re Carol A. ORAWSKY, Debtor. *132 Patricia A. Mayer, Attorney for Debtor. I. INTRODUCTION Carol A. Orawsky ("the Debtor") filed a chapter 13 bankruptcy petition on April 17, 2007. The Plan places the Debtor's unsecured claims into two categories: (1) student loan claims that are presumptively nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 1328(a)(2) and (2) all other allowed unsecured claims. Proportionately speaking, the Plan proposes to make a greater distribution to the Debtor's more.

Citation: 219 B.R. 88 | Docket No.: 19-10885
Status: Published | Citing: 11
Summary: 219 B.R. 88 (1998) In re JEFLEY, INC., Debtor. Because we believe that the Debtor's proposal for modification of the agreement on record, which will expire seventeen days from the date of this Opinion on March 20, 1998, did not specify any reduction in the principals' own salaries and may not reduce payments to creditors commensurate with the reductions to union members, we conclude that the proposal, as presented, is not "necessary" to the Debtor's reorganization; does not treat the union more.

Citation: 83 B.R. 270 | Docket No.: 19-11124
Status: Published | Citing: 37
Summary: 83 B.R. 270 (1988) In re John MARCH, Debtor. Geri H. Gallagher, Norristown, Pa., for debtor, John March. The creditor whose objection to confirmation is before me, Savin Corporation ("Savin"), is an unsecured judgment creditor of the debtor, John March. [4] Savin contends that the debtor's bankruptcy plan was not proposed in good faith because it was purportedly filed solely to avoid payment of the judgment entered *273 against the debtor in district court. Prior to passage of the 1984 more.

Citation: 1 B.R. 132 | Docket No.: 19-10250
Status: Published | Citing: 10
Summary: 1 B.R. 132 (1979) In re Albert E. VAIL and Rita M. Vail, his wife, Individually and as Tenants by entireties (M) (Bankruptcy Nos. 77-434 and 77-435 consolidated with this Case), Debtors. The FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF STRASBURG, Plaintiff, v. Albert E. VAIL and Rita M. Vail, his wife, Individually and as Tenants by the entireties. The pertinent facts may be briefly summarized as follows: On June 8, 1976, Defendants, Albert E. Vail and his wife, Rita M. Vail, conveyed 1.66 acres of real property to more.

Citation: 93 B.R. 859 | Docket No.: 19-10060
Status: Published | Citing: 38
Summary: 93 B.R. 859 (1988) In re TM CARLTON HOUSE PARTNERS, LTD., Debtor. TM CARLTON HOUSE PARTNERS, LTD. and Skokie Federal Savings and Loan Association, Plaintiffs, v. CAREER PLANNERS, INC. and Career Institute, Inc., Defendants. Since the Debtor, TM CARLTON HOUSE PARTNERS, LTD. (hereinafter "the Debtor"), convinced us to deny an attempt to lift the automatic stay to allow a pre-petition Judicate proceeding to continue, filed by CAREER PLANNERS, INC. and CAREER INSTITUTE, INC. (hereinafter referred more.

Citation: 7 B.R. 469 | Docket No.: 19-10204
Status: Published | Citing: 6
Summary: 7 B.R. 469 (1980) In re John J. GILECE, Jr., Debtor. FARMERS AND MECHANICS NATIONAL BANK, Plaintiff, v. John J. GILECE, Jr., Defendant. [4] The effect of the execution of those documents by the debtor, and we so find and conclude, was to obligate the debtor personally, as principal or guarantor, on five promissory notes in the face amount of $1,075,000. Assuming, then, that the debtor's interest, for purposes of interpretation under § 362 of the Code, could be as much as an interest in the more.

Citation: 358 B.R. 202 | Docket No.: 19-11382
Status: Published | Citing: 30
Summary: 358 B.R. 202 (2006) In re R.H.R. MECHANICAL CONTRACTORS, INC., Debtor. I. INTRODUCTION Presently before me in this Chapter 11 case is the Objection of R.H.R. Mechanical Contractors, Inc. ("the Debtor" or "R.H.R.") to the proof of claim of Claimant *204 Sheet Metal Workers Local 19 Benefit Funds ("the Union"). The Union asserts an unsecured claim based on a pre-petition writ of execution it served on the Debtor[1] to collect a judgment the Union obtained against one of the Debtor's creditors, more.