The Branham Corporation v. Boone County Utilities, LLC (In re Boone County Utilities, LLC)

(S.D. Ind. Jan. 22, 2018)

The district court affirms several orders of the bankruptcy court and remands for further proceedings with respect to sanctions. The plaintiff appealed orders and issues related to subject matter jurisdiction, summary judgment, plan and confirmation order interpretation, discovery, dismissal of a complaint, and sanctions against the plaintiff. Opinion below.

Judge: Young

Attorney for Plaintiff: Jacobson Hile, LLC; Michael W. Hile

Attorney for Debtor: Bator Law, LLC; John E. Bator

2018-01-22 – in re boone county utilities

Author: Matt Lindblom

Spearman v. Commonwealth Credit Union

(Bankr. W.D. Ky. Mar. 9, 2017)

The bankruptcy court grants summary judgment in favor of the creditor in this adversary proceeding in which the debtor alleged violations of the automatic stay and claims under the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act. The court holds that the creditor bank’s restriction of the debtor’s electronic privileges with respect to her accounts did not violate the automatic stay. Opinion below.

Judge: Stout

Attorney for Debtor: Ross Benjamin Neuhauser

Attorney for Creditor: Christopher M. Hill

2017-03-09 – in re spearman

Author: Matt Lindblom

Hunt v. Spencer (In re Spencer)

(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Feb. 24, 2017)

The bankruptcy court denies the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in this nondischargeability action under 11 U.S.C. §§ 523(a)(2), (4), and (6). The plaintiff argued that a state court judgment collaterally estopped the debtor from defending against the claims. The court holds that the findings in the state court judgment are insufficient to prevent the debtor from asserting a defense in this action. Opinion below.

Judge: Carr

Attorney for Plaintiff: Mulvey Law LLC, Joseph L. Mulvey

Attorney for Debtor: Mercho Caughey & DeLay, Tarek Elias Mercho

2017-02-24-in-re-spencer

Author: Matt Lindblom

Nelson v. Taylor (In re Taylor)

(Bankr. E.D. Ky. Nov. 28, 2016)

The bankruptcy court enters summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in this 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) nondischargeability action. The plaintiffs had obtained a state court default judgment against the debtor for damages caused to them when the debtor drove to their home and shot one of the plaintiffs and injured the other plaintiff with flying debris. The court holds that collateral estoppel bars the debtor from relitigating the issue of whether the debtor caused a willful and malicious injury to the plaintiffs. Opinion below.

Judge: Wise

Attorney for Plaintiff: Noah R. Friend Law Firm, PLLC, Noah R. Friend

Attorney or Defendant: Jeanne K. Channell

2016-11-28-in-re-taylor

Author: Matt Lindblom

Hager v. Maynard (In re Maynard)

(Bankr. E.D. Ky. Nov. 1, 2016)

The bankruptcy court grants the debtor’s motion for summary judgment in this 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) nondishargeability action. The plaintiff alleged the debtor willfully and maliciously injured the plaintiff, but failed to offer any evidence that would create a material factual dispute as to the debtor’s intent with respect to actions that gave rise to a prepetition judgment against the debtor. The court finds summary judgment in favor of the debtor is appropriate. Opinion below.

Judge: Wise

Attorney for Plaintiff: Noah R. Friend Law Firm, PLLC, Noah R. Friend

Attorney for Debtor: Daryle M. Ronning, James P. Pruitt, Jr.

Author: Matt Lindblom

2016-11-01-in-re-maynard

Nelson v. Fifth Third Bank (In re Brunsman)

(6th Cir. B.A.P. June 1, 2016)

The Sixth Circuit B.A.P. reverses the bankruptcy court’s sua sponte granting of summary judgment in favor of the trustee. The trustee brought the action to avoid the appellants’  liens in the debtor’s aircraft. The bankruptcy court abused its discretion in granting summary judgment because its decision was not based on undisputed facts. Instead, the bankruptcy court based its decision on assumptions derived from the appellants’ inability to produce sufficient documentation. Opinion below.

Judge: Harrison

Attorneys for Appellee: Cohen, Todd, Kite & Stanford, Donald W. Mallory, Richard Dunbar Nelson

Attorneys for Appellants: Staatman, Harris, & Eyrich, William Brokate Fecher, Alan Joel Statman; Eileen Kay Field, Albert T. Brown, Jr.

2016-06-01 – in re brunsman

Author: Matt Lindblom

CMCO Mortgage, LLC v. Hill

(Bankr. W.D. Ky. Nov. 2, 2015)

The bankruptcy court grants the creditor’s motion for summary judgment in this nondischargeability action. The creditor had obtained a default judgment against the debtor in state court, after the debtor ceased participating in that litigation. The default judgment contained specific findings of fact that satisfied the elements of 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6), which applies to claims for conduct causing a “willful and malicious injury.” The court holds that collateral estoppel applies and summary judgment is appropriate. Opinion below.

2015-11-02 – cmco mortgage v hill

Author: Matt Lindblom

Knauer v. Krantz (In re Eastern Livestock Co., LLC)

(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Oct. 28, 2015)

The bankruptcy court grants the defendant’s motion for summary judgment in this preference action. The defendant had sold and delivered cattle to the debtor prepetition and received payment in the form of checks three days after delivery. The checks were then voided and replaced by a single wire transfer a few days later. All of this occurred within 90 days of the petition date. The court finds that the ordinary course defense does not apply based on lack of evidence of the terms of prior transactions between the parties. The court finds, however, that the contemporaneous exchange defense is applicable. The debtor and the defendant intended a contemporaneous exchange and such an exchange was actually accomplished (despite the voiding of the checks and replacement by wire transfer). Opinion below.

2015-10-28 – knauer v krantz

Author: Matt Lindblom

Kotsopoulos v. Fifth Third Mortgage Co. (In re Kotsopoulos)

(Bankr. N.D. Ind. Oct. 10, 2014)

The bankruptcy court grants the bank’s motion for summary judgment and dismisses the debtors’ adversary complaint against it. Prepetition, the bank had foreclosed on the debtors’ mortgage in state court. The debtors’ complaint alleged that the bank knew it had an invalid mortgage when it sought the relief in state court, which constituted fraud and an abuse of process. The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred the complaint. That doctrine prohibits a lower federal court from reviewing a state court’s final judgment. Because the state court enforced the mortgage in favor of the bank, the bankruptcy court could not reconsider whether the mortgage was valid. Opinion below.

2014-10-10 – in re kotsopoulos

Dunn v. Campbell (In re Campbell)

(Bankr. W.D. Ky. Issued June 16, 2014)

Judge Lloyd denies the debtor’s motion to reconsider the Court’s order granting summary judgment to the plaintiff, finding the plaintiff’s claim against the debtor was nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(6). The Court rejects the debtor’s arguments, stating that the nondischargeability action could not serve as an appeal of the state court’s judgment establishing the debt. Opinion below.

2014-06-16 – dunn v campbell