Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Court Cases

Search
  1. In Re Williams (1993)

    Debtor Williams has filed a Motion for Contempt, Sanctions and Costs directed against the Idaho State Bar Association and Michael J. Oths, its counsel, seeking a declaration that these parties are in "contempt of the stay order." More particularly, Debtor alleges that the Bar[1] has violated either the automatic stay against collection activities in Section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, or the discharge injunction found at Section 524(a) of the Code, by insisting that he reimburse the Bar for [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: Bankruptcy No. 89-03343
  2. In Re Wilhelm (2009)

    In each of the above cases, parties claiming to be secured creditors (collectively, "Movants") seek relief from the automatic stay. According to Movants, debtors have defaulted on their obligations under secured promissory notes.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 08-02856-TLM, 09-20024-TLM, 08-20577-TLM, 09-20400-TLM, 09-00124-TLM
  3. In Re Steinhaus (2006)

    Idaho Central Credit Union ("Creditor") filed a "Motion to Confirm Termination of the Automatic Stay, Compel Surrender of Vehicle, and Authorize Foreclosure upon Vehicle" in this chapter 7 case. See Doc. No. 20 ("Motion"). Creditor contends the 2005 amendments to the Bankruptcy Code not only eliminated a debtor's right to a "ride-through" option for personal property securing a debt, but also expanded creditors' arsenal of possible relief should they try.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 06-00429-TLM
  4. In Re Farness (2000)

    Herbert and Nita Farness ("Debtors") contracted with L.D. Wees ("Wees") to prepare their chapter 13 petition, schedules, statement of financial affairs, and proposed chapter 13 plan which were filed on July 29, 1999. Wees is a "bankruptcy petition preparer" as defined by § 110(a)(1).[1]


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: Bankruptcy No. 99-01931
  5. In Re Steinmetz (2001)

    Chapter 7 Trustee R. Sam Hopkins ("Trustee") objects to an exemption claimed by Debtors Larry D. and Carrie L. Steinmetz ("Debtors") concerning a portion of their federal income tax refund (Docket No. 23). A hearing was held on February 5, 2001, after which this matter was taken under advisement. The following constitutes this Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law. Fed.R.Bankr.P. 7052; 9014.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 00-41660
  6. In Re Cavanaugh (1994)

    Pursuant to Idaho Code §§ 55-1001[1] and 55-1004(1)[2] the debtors have claimed the residence located at 1528 Grelle Avenue, Lewiston, Idaho (the "residence") as their homestead.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: Bankruptcy No. 94-01709
  7. In Re Fehrs (2008)

    In Adv. No. 06-07020-TLM, creditor Abel O. Murrietta ("Murrietta"), and in Adv. No. 07-07033-TLM, Debtor's chapter 7 trustee, Ford Elsaesser ("Trustee"), seek to revoke the discharge previously granted Debtor. See §§ 727(d)(1) and (2).[1] Trustee also sued Debtor in Adv. No. 07-07032-TLM to avoid an alleged fraudulent transfer under §§ 548(a)(1)(A) and (B).


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: Bankruptcy No. 05-21306-TLM. Adversary Nos. 06-07020-TLM, 07-07032-TLM, 07-07033-TLM
  8. In Re Littman (2007)

    This chapter 7 case presents issues under the means test of amended § 707(b).[1] The United States Trustee ("UST") filed a motion under § 707(b)(1), Doc. No. 22 (the "Motion"), contending the granting of chapter 7 relief would be an abuse and that, unless this case is converted voluntarily to chapter 13, it should be dismissed. To resolve this Motion, the Court must evaluate whether child support payments due under a post-petition state court order may be deducted under § 707(b)(2)(A)(iv) in [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 07-20034-TLM
  9. In Re Doser (2002)

    Judith M. Scott does business in Boise as "We the People," a sole proprietorship. Ms. Scott prepares legal documents for her customers, including bankruptcy petitions, schedules and statements, for a fee. Kevin and Laura Doser retained Ms. Scott to prepare the legal pleadings necessary to file for relief in this Court under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. They paid Ms. Scott $199.00 for the bankruptcy papers, and another $15.00 for photocopies. The Dosers filed their bankruptcy case with [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 01-03630
  10. In Re Kline (2005)

    The Chapter 7 Trustee, R. Sam Hopkins, filed a timely objection on May 4, 2005, to Debtors Ronald and Barbara Kline's homestead exemption claim in their cabin in Lava Hot Springs, Idaho. Sched. C, Docket No. 5; Obj., Docket No. 11. Trustee contends that Debtors did not establish an automatic exemption in their Lava cabin because they resided in Layton, Utah, and used the Lava house as a vacation home. The Court conducted an evidentiary hearing on June 24, 2005, concerning Trustee's objection, [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 05-40479
  11. In Re Kelvie (2007)

    William and Pollyanna Kelvie ("Debtors") filed their chapter 7 petition for relief on November 10, 2006. Doc. No. 1. The provisions of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ("BAPCPA"), Pub.L. 109-8, 119 Stat. 23 (2005), apply.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 06-01434-TLM
  12. In Re Bush (2002)

    Mikie Bush represented herself in her chapter 7 case. When Wells Fargo Bank served her with a motion for stay relief on her 2000 Plymouth Neon, she came to court. During the hearing, the Court asked her how she came to believe, as shown on her schedule C, that the car was "exempt" and how she reached the decision to "reaffirm" the Wells Fargo debt as she indicated on her § 521 statement of intention. She replied that Leo Wees, her bankruptcy petition preparer, told her how to complete those [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 01-02958, 01-3151
  13. In Re Castorena (2001)

    In the 19 consumer chapter 7 cases shown in the above caption, attorney Tom Hale ("Counsel") provided legal services to the debtors. Even so, each of the debtors appeared pro se in prosecution of his, her or their case.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 01-40473, 01-40625, 01-40687, 01-40696, 01-40749, 01-40750, 01-40782, 01-40783, 01-40804, 01-40806, 01-40808, 01-40822 to 01-40824, 01-40855 to 01-40857, 01-40876, 01-40877
  14. In Re Ritchie (2000)

    Neil and Teresa Ritchie ("Plaintiffs") filed for relief under Chapter 13 on July 29, 1999.[1] An order confirming Plaintiffs' Chapter 13 plan was entered by this Court on May 30, 2000. Plaintiffs commenced these adversary proceedings against Student Loan Fund of Idaho ("SLFI") and Northwest Education Loan Association ("NELA")[2] (collectively "Defendants") on May 11, 2000, seeking a declaration from the Court that their obligation to repay their student loans should be discharged pursuant to [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: Bankruptcy No. 99-41251. Adversary Nos. 00-6154, 00-6155
  15. In Re Rodriguez (2005)

    Oscar Rodriguez and Elizabeth Olivo ("Debtors") filed a voluntary joint bankruptcy petition under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code, Title 11 of the U.S. Code, on November 2, 2005. See Doc. No. 1. Since their petition was filed after October 17, 2005, the Bankruptcy Code amendments of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-8, 119 Stat. 23 (2005) ("BAPCPA"), apply.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 05-05694-TLM
  16. In Re Meek (2007)

    In this case, the chapter 13 debtors, the chapter 13 trustee and the U.S. Trustee[1] disagree on how several provisions of the Bankruptcy Code as amended by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, Pub.L. No. 109-8, 119 Stat. 23 (2005) ("BAPCPA") should be interpreted and applied. In particular, in the context of confirmation of the debtors' proposed chapter 13 plan, they disagree on how "projected disposable income" for "above median income" chapter 13 debtors [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 06-20307-TLM
  17. In Re Daniels (2004)

    There was a time in America when debtors were jailed for not paying their debts. In reviewing the facts of this case, it appears perhaps that time has not passed. In this case, a state court judge issued a warrant for the arrest of Timothy Daniels ("Debtor") at the request of Bannock Collections, Inc. ("Creditor") after Creditor was unable to collect a judgment against him for $367.08. Debtor filed for relief under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code. After the filing, while the arrest warrant [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 04-41306
  18. In Re Millspaugh (2003)

    In this chapter 13 case, Randy and Sharon Millspaugh (the "Debtors") seek to "strip off" a creditor's security interest in their residence through a provision in their plan. Though the creditor has not objected to this treatment and no other party objected to confirmation of the Debtors' chapter 13 plan, the Court took the matter under advisement in order to evaluate the procedure urged by the Debtors.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: 03-00726
  19. In Re Lemos (1999)

    In this adversary proceeding, Plaintiff Edward Lemos, a Chapter 7 debtor, seeks to establish that certain funds received after the filing of his bankruptcy petition through the federal Crop Loss Disaster Assistance Program ("CLDAP") are not property of his bankruptcy estate. The Defendant, Chapter 7 trustee, Bernie Rakozy, contends the money is property of the bankruptcy estate and should be distributed to creditors. A trial was conducted on October 14, 1999, and the matter was taken under [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: Bankruptcy No. 98-00551. Adversary No. 99-6173
  20. In Re Endicott (2000)

    Spokane Railway Credit Union, now operating under the name Numerica Credit Union ("Plaintiff") seeks a determination that a debt owed by chapter 7 debtors Gregory and Tammy Endicott ("Debtors" or "Defendants") is nondischargeable under § 523(a)(6).[1] Trial was held on September 25, 2000, and the matter taken under advisement.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho Docket: Bankruptcy No. 99-21507. Adversary No. 00-6107

1 of 22 Page(s)

Page:
  1. 2
  2. 3
  3. 4
  4. 5