Recently in Bankruptcy Law Category

Order of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel reversing an order of the Bankruptcy Court is affirmed as a late alimony payment penalty was not a domestic support obligation, and as such, the ex-wife's claim was a general unsecured claim not entitled to priority status and consequently dischargeable.     

Read In re: Smith, No. 09-9005

Appellate Information

Appeal from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

Decided November 6, 2009

Judges

Before:  Boudin, Torruella, and Saris, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Torruella, Circuit Judge

Counsel

For Appellant:  Clifford P. Gallant, Jr., Beliveau Fradetter Doyle & Gallant, PA.

For Appellee:  Mark P. Cornell, Kelly Ovitt Puc, Cornell and Ovitt Puc, PLLC.

In a case arising from bankruptcy proceedings involving fraudulent transfers, given the deficiencies of the present briefing, the appeal is dismissed and defendant's counsel ordered to show cause by written response as to why the court should not order payment by him personally of attorney's fees, double costs or both for a brief that renders the appeal frivolous.     

Read In re: Simply Media, Inc. , No. 08-2498

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Hampshire

Decided October 8, 2009

Judges

Before: Torruella, Ripple, and Boudin, Circuit Judges

Per Curium Opinion

Counsel

For Appellant:  James V. Tabner

For Appellee:   Todd B. Gordon, Stephen F. Gordon and The Gordon Law Firm LLP

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel judgment is affirmed where, in calculating monthly income under the means test for identifying an abusive Chapter 7 petition, the plain language of 11 U.S.C. sec. 707(b)(2) allows debtors to deduct payments due on a secured debt notwithstanding the debtor's intention to surrender the collateral.    

Read In re Rudler, No. 08-9007

Appellate Information
Appeal from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel of the First Circuit.
Decided August 5, 2009

Judges
Before Lynch, Chief Judge, Boudin and Lipez, Circuit Judges.
Opinion by Lipez, Circuit Judge.

Counsel
For Appellant: Teal Luthy Miller.

For Appellee: Scott W. LaPointe.

In an action related to bankruptcy proceedings, district court judgment is affirmed where: 1) the court properly denied plaintiff's jury trial demand in the turnover action as no Seventh Amendment right to trial by jury attaches to the statutory turnover action authorized by 11 U.S.C. sec. 542; 2) the court properly granted attorney Ziady's motion to dismiss the defendant's fourth-party complaint for negligent misrepresentation as attorney Ziady owed no legal duty to defendant; and 3) the court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion to amend the fourth-party complaint, as the record shows that the defendant's proposed amendment would have been futile. District court judgment is reversed where the court erred in its turnover order for the insurance proceeds as defendant's expenditures were not made in the ordinary course of business. 

Read Braunstein v. McCabe, No. 08-1690

Appellate Information
APPEAL from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.  
Decided: June 26, 2009

Judges
Before Lynch, Chief Judge, Torruella and Lipez, Circuit Judges. 
Opinion by Lynch, Chief Judge.

Counsel
For Appellant: Joseph H. Reinhardt
For Appellee:  Mark W. Corner