Opinions

 

The NCMB offers a database of opinions for the years 2000 onward, listed by year and judge. For a more detailed search, enter the keyword or case number in the search box above.

Order granting summary judgment in part and denying summary judgment in part.  Underlying state court judgment precludes relitigation of second defendant's status as a fiduciary of a technical trust, but does not preclude the issue with respect to the first defendant because the state court judgment did not establish that the first defendant was a fiduciary of a technical trust as required under section 523(a)(4).  Further, because the state court's findings regarding defendants' intent were unnecessary to the determination of the underlying state court claims, those findings were not entitled to issue preclusion under Oregon law.

Summary Judgment, Published Yes

The debtors moved to continue the hearing on confirmation of their original chapter 12 plan and extend the deadline for concluding the confirmation hearing for cause pursuant to § 1224.  The debtors requested additional time to establish historical evidence of an additional stream of income for purposes of feasibility and to allow the debtors to amend their original plan to address objections filed by the secured creditors, the chapter 12 trustee, and the Bankruptcy Administrator.  The debtors made it clear that they would not seek confirmation of their original plan but intended to file an amended plan.  The Court held that there was not cause to continue the confirmation hearing nor was there cause to extend the 45-day period for concluding the confirmation hearing under § 1224.  In so holding, the Court determined that, under § 1223(b), if the debtors file a modified plan, the modified plan will become the plan for purposes of the deadline for confirmation of the plan under § 1224.

Chapter 12 Plans, Published Yes

Oder overruling Debtor's objection to a postpetition notice for its failure to comply with the requirements of N.C. Gen. Stat.  §  45-91(1), finding that "fee" as contemplated by §  45-91 does not include an expense for hazard insurance.

Claims, Published Yes

The Debtor filed a motion to convert his case from Chapter 7 to Chapter 11 pursuant to section 706(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. Under section 706(d) the case may not be converted unless the debtor may be a debtor under such chapter. The court denied the Debtor's motion to convert his case from Chapter 7 to Chapter 11. The court determined that the objecting parties met their burden of proof by a preponderance of the evidence that the conversion should be denied, based upon cause under section 1112(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, including a substantial or continuing loss to or diminution of the estate and the absence of a reasonable likelihood of rehabilitation under 1112(b)(4)(A) and a lack of good faith.

Conversion, Published No
Subscribe to Opinions