Skip to Content (Press Enter)

Skip to Nav (Press Enter)

Bankruptcy

The following summaries are of recent published decisions of the California appellate courts, the Ninth Circuit, and the United States Supreme Court. The summaries are presented without regard to whether Severson & Werson represented a party in the case.

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

Bankruptcy courts should use federal choice-of-law rules to determine which state’s law to  apply (such as, here, which statute of limitations is applicable).  Read More

Normal Chapter 11 priority rules apply to structured dismissals of Chapter 11 cases, so that in a structured dismissal, lower priority creditors may not be paid over the objection of higher priority creditors whose claims have not been fully satisfied.  Read More

Bankruptcy trustee may recoup debtor’s mortgage payoff to lender, which was made less than 90 days before filing bankruptcy.  Read More

Debtor who failed to appeal within the 14-day bankruptcy appeal deadline from an order denying his third motion to reconsider denial of motion for sanctions for violation of the automatic stay, could not cure the untimeliness of the appeal by use of a petition for writ of mandate.  Read More

Approval of Vallejo’s Chapter 9 plan did not discharge debts of the city’s non-bankrupt police officers or shield them from personal liability on a judgment for using excessive force to arrest the plaintiff, and since judgment was entered against the police officers after Vallejo’s plan was approved, the city must indemnify the officers as state law requires.  Read More

Bankruptcy court properly denied a creditor’s claim for attorney fees incurred in successfully prosecuting a mechanics lien suit against debtor, since the Chapter 11 plan which allowed the creditor to proceed with the suit did not allow for recovery of attorney fees and the fees would have been fairly within creditor’s contemplation at the time the compromise Chapter 11 plan… Read More

A bankruptcy’s order approving the trustee’s settlement of the estate’s claims against a defendant is a sale under 11 USC 363(m) and is unreviewable on appeal unless the bankruptcy court grants a stay pending appeal.  Read More

A settlement payment that is clawed back in bankruptcy as a voidable preference does not count as performance of the settlement agreement, so the party entitled to payment can pursue the debtor’s guarantors for the clawed back amount.  Read More

Former husband of bankrupt spouse could raise his homestead exemption to oppose the bankruptcy trustee's motion to sell the property free and clear, since the former husband resided in the home at the time the former wife filed her bankruptcy petition.  Read More

A homeowners’ association was properly ordered to pay compensatory damages to the bankrupt for knowingly violating the bankruptcy discharge injunction by suing to quiet title, following non-judicial foreclosure of its lien on the bankrupt’s condo, based in part on pre-bankruptcy unpaid HOA dues.  Read More

A bankruptcy trustee may reject as an executory contract a pre-bankruptcy retainer agreement the bankrupt entered into with a lawyer in contemplation of future non-dischargeability litigation—thereby recovering for the bankrupt estate the retainer the bankrupt paid before filing his bankruptcy petition.  Read More

A settlement of claims brought by the liquidating trustee overseeing bankrupt corporation’s liquidating trust is properly approved if in entering into it the trustee has made a “good faith judgment in the best interests of the beneficiaries of the liquidating trust to maximize net recoveries”; the more demanding “fair and equitable” standard which is applied to settlements by regular bankruptcy… Read More

11 U.S.C. 727(a)(2)—which provides that a debt may be exempted from discharge if the debtor has, within one year before filing his bankruptcy petition, made a fraudulent transfer—is not a statute of limitations and is not subject to equitable tolling.  Read More

“Actual fraud” for purposes of the 11 USC 523(a)(2)(A) exemption is construed broadly to encompass fraudulent transfers of property designed to hinder or delay creditors.  Read More

The defendant’s jury demand in the bankruptcy trustee’s adversary proceeding did not deprive the bankruptcy court of jurisdiction to decide a non-merits issue, such as whether to compel arbitration, and arbitration was properly denied since, in claiming a fraudulent transfer, the trustee stepped into the shoes of a judgment creditor, not the debtor, which had signed the arbitration clause.  Read More

1 2 3 4 5