Justia Bankruptcy Opinion Summaries

U.S. Bank appealed from an order granting the motion of debtor to value U.S. Bank's allowed secured claim pursuant to section 506(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, and valuing the claim at $3,500,000. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel held that the order was not final but that U.S. Bank's alternative request to grant leave to appeal it as an interlocutory order should be granted. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel also concluded that low income tax credits that the owner of the property was eligible to claim, as well as the obligations they imposed, did affect the value of the property and should have been considered as part of the property's value. Accordingly, the court reversed and remanded. View "U.S. Bank Nat'l Assoc. v. Lewis & Clark Apartments, et al" on Justia Law

Frank Williams and Stephen Sherman Wyse appealed from a bankruptcy court order granting in part and denying in part Wyse's Motion to Reconsider Order of the Court Granting in part the Motion for Sanctions. The bankruptcy court ruled that Williams had to dismiss count I of a state court complaint within 15 days of the order but could continue to pursue counts II and III. The order reaffirmed an award of attorney fees to be paid by Wyse to debtor. The court affirmed the judgment, holding that King's pre-conversion debt was discharged. View "Williams, et al v. King" on Justia Law

Debtors appealed from the ruling of the bankruptcy court granting summary judgment to SunTrust and denying summary judgment to debtors, on debtors' adversary complaint that challenged SunTrust's standing to enforce a promissory note and deed of trust on debtors' property, and sought to remove the deed of trust from the chain of title to such property. The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's judgment and held that the promissory note was a negotiable instrument and that SunTrust was entitled to enforce it and the deed of trust. The bankruptcy court properly used evidence from the affidavit of SunTrust's representative and properly applied judicial estoppel. View "Knigge, et al v. SunTrust Mortgage, Inc." on Justia Law

Debtors appealed the bankruptcy court's order granting CitiMortgage's motion to dismiss debtors' adversary proceeding seeking the avoidance of CitiMortgage's lien on debtors' residence. The court concluded that a secured creditor's lien could not be avoided under 11 U.S.C. 506(d) based solely on the fact that the creditor's claim had been disallowed for untimeliness. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment. View "Shelton, et al v. CitiMortgage, Inc." on Justia Law

The bankruptcy court denied debtors a claimed exemption in an unliquidated personal injury claim. On appeal, debtors argued that the Eighth Circuit precedent relied upon by the bankruptcy court was erroneous and that the court should disregard and reverse. Because debtors' arguments raised issues already decided by the Eighth Circuit, the court was compelled by principles of stare decisis to affirm the bankruptcy court's disallowance of debtors' exemptions. View "Abdul-Rahim, et al v. LaBarge" on Justia Law

Debtor appealed from an order of the bankruptcy court dismissing his Chapter 13 case and an order denying his motion for a new trial. The court held that the trustee's brief was filed on the date it was due and debtor's objection, construed as a motion to strike, was denied; the proposed amicus brief had no bearing on the matters currently on appeal, so the motion for leave to file was denied; and the bankruptcy court's findings were supported by the facts of the case and it did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the Chapter 13 case nor denying the motion for new trial. View "Paulson v. Wein" on Justia Law

The bankruptcy court denied confirmation of debtor's initial Chapter 13 plan because it proposed to "strip off" second and third mortgage liens on his residence. Debtor filed a modified plan that preserved those liens, noting his objection, and appealed the bankruptcy court's confirmation of the modified plan to the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (BAP). The BAP reversed, concluding that a Chapter 13 debtor could strip a wholly unsecured residential mortgage lien, addressing additional issues, and remanded to the bankruptcy court to consider whether debtor's plan complied with the other confirmation requirements. The trustee appealed. The court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the BAP's remand order was not a final order for purposes of 28 U.S.C. 158(d)(1). View "Fisette v. Keller" on Justia Law

Debtor filed for protection under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. The United States Trustee subsequently filed a complaint seeking a denial of Debtor's discharge under 11 U.S.C. 727(a)(3) and (a)(5) based on Debtor's alleged failure to maintain adequate financial records and to satisfactorily explain a loss of assets. After Debtor filed his answer, the bankruptcy court granted the Trustee's motion for judgment on the pleadings to deny Debtor's discharge. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, holding (1) the pleadings contained insufficient facts to deny Debtor's discharge under section 727(a)(3) and (a)(5), and accordingly, the judgment on the pleadings motion should have been denied; and (2) collateral estoppel did not bar Debtor from denying the Trustee's allegations. View "McDermott v. Swanson" on Justia Law

Joseph Terry, who received long-term disability benefits, filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition. Terry later sued the bankruptcy trustee, seeking a declaration that his disability insurance provider, Standard Insurance Company, should not have reduced his benefits by the amount of certain "voidable" payments. The bankruptcy court ruled that Standard was precluded from recouping the payments. The bankruptcy appellate panel (BAP) reversed, holding that recoupment was subject to a a "balancing of the equities." On remand, the bankruptcy court found that the equities prevented Standard from recouping the payments. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed, holding that the BAP (1) erred by introducing a balancing of the equities test into the doctrine of recoupment and by invoking these equitable principles to deny Standard a right of recoupment; and (2) abused its discretion in how it weighed the equities. View "Terry v. Standard Ins. Co." on Justia Law

Debtor appealed the bankruptcy court's order denying Debtor's claim of an exemption for limited partnership units that she received from her employer, Kwik Trip, Inc. The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the decision of the bankruptcy court, holding that the Kwik Trip benefit plan was similar to the plans listed in Minn. Stat. 550.37, 24, and the right to payments thereunder were on account of Debtor's length of service at Kwik Trip. Therefore, the Court held Debtor may properly claim her interests in the limited partnership units distributed under the Kwik Trip employee benefit plan as exempt. Remanded to determine whether the amount of Debtor's interest in the partnership and benefit plan over the statutory limit was reasonably necessary for her support. View "Foellmi v. Ries" on Justia Law