Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Court Cases

Search
  1. In Re Melancon (1998)

    In this adversary proceeding, LA Capitol Federal Credit Union (LA Cap) asks this court to determine whether two debts owed it by the defendants, Ewell Earl Melancon, Jr. and Suzonne Wright Melancon (debtors), are excepted from discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §§ 523(a)(2)(A) and (B). For the following reasons, the court rules that one of the debts is dischargeable, while the other is not.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 95-10104, Adversary No. 95-1037
  2. In Re Blount (2002)

    Before the Court are the objections of the trustee, Dwayne Murray ("Trustee"), and the debtor Ronnie Blount ("Debtor"), to the unsecured claim of Whitney National Bank ("Whitney"). The unsecured claim, for a deficiency over the credit given through a post-petition foreclosure upon the property securing the claim, includes post-petition interest and attorney's fees. Also before the Court is the (alternative) request by Whitney that it or its lawyer be awarded attorney's fees under 11 U.S.C. § [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: 97-11941
  3. In Re Rogers (2008)

    Debtors Stephen and Julie Rogers sued B-Real, L.L.C. ("B-Real") to recover damages resulting from B-Real's filing of three time-barred proofs of claim. B-Real moved to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 07-11293. Adversary No. 08-1011
  4. In Re Pampas (2007)

    The United States Trustee has moved to dismiss the debtor's petition pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 707(b). This motion presents two issues: 1) the propriety of claiming an, unborn child as an additional household member on the means test form, Form B22A, and 2) the debtor's ability to claim the $471 transportation ownership cost for, her unencumbered vehicle. This memorandum opinion sets forth the court's reasons for granting the U.S. Trustee's motion to dismiss.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: 06-10936
  5. In Re Zohdi (1999)

    The issue before the Court, as best we can tell of first impression, is the proper interpretation of the Religious Freedom and Charitable Donation Protection Act of 1998 as it pertains to transfers avoidable under § 548[1] of the Bankruptcy Code. Does the "safe harbor" provision of § 548(a)(2)[2] allow a transferee to retain the portion of a pre-petition transfer that does not exceed 15 percent of the debtors gross income? For the reasons set forth herein, we find that if a transfer exceeds [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 97-12631, Adversary No. 98-1087
  6. In Re Ballard (1999)

    Before the Court is a proposed compromise and settlement of a pre-petition cause of action for personal injuries suffered by the debtor, which requires that we answer the question whether the debtor, individually, should be entitled to share to the extent that the settlement amount is attributable to post-petition future medical expenses and, perhaps, post-petition lost earning capacity.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 96-11935
  7. In Re Richardson (1998)

    The matter before the Court is a Motion to Dismiss this Chapter 13 case, which requires that this Court determine which of the competing interpretations of 11 U.S.C. § 109(g)(2) is correct. For the following reasons, the Court interprets the statute to dictate dismissal of a case when a debtor has been a debtor in a case pending within 180 days prior to the present case, in which voluntary dismissal was requested and obtained after a creditor filed a motion for relief from the automatic stay. [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 97-10737
  8. In Re Hendrick (1985)

    The facts of this case are unusually important. The issues involved are personal and highly emotional. The trial climate has also been significant. Each motion and issue has been vigorously contested, even ordinarily routine ones. Of course, the issue of plan confirmation has been especially heated.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 83-00787
  9. Landry v. Exxon Pipeline Co. (2001)

    Before the Court is Defendants' Motion to Transfer this matter to the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Texas, and Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand this matter to the Eighteenth Judicial District Court for the Parish of Iberville, State of Louisiana ("State Court"). For the following reasons, the Court grants Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand, therefore, the Defendant's Motion to Transfer is moot.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: 99-1084
  10. In Re Gonday (1983)

    This matter comes before the Court on a complaint filed by Economy Brick Sales, Inc., a creditor herein, on August 10, 1982, seeking to bar the discharge of the abovenamed debtors, Roger Gonday and Marie B. Gonday. A hearing on the complaint was held on October 28, 1982, and the matter was taken under advisement. The disposition of the issues presented in said complaint is now addressed herein.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 82-00274, Adv. No. 82-0162
  11. In Re Cajun Elec. Power Co-Op., Inc. (1999)

    David S. Rubin, Kantrow, Spaht, Weaver & Blitzer, Baton Rouge, LA, Lon A. Jenkins, Annette W. Jarvis and Mark Dykes, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene, & MacRae, LLP, Salt Lake City, Utah, John Parks, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene, & MacRae, LLP, Denver, CO, for Ralph R. Mabey, chapter 11 Trustee.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Civ.A. No. 94-2763 B-2, Bankruptcy No. 94-11474, Adversary No. 96-1052
  12. In Re MMR Holding Corp. (1996)

    This matter comes before this Court on cross-motions for summary judgment. For the reasons stated below, this Court grants summary judgment in favor of the defendant, C & C Consultants, Inc., and denies summary judgment to plaintiff, the debtor (MMR).


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy Nos. 90-00395, 90-00396 to 00403, Adv. No. 92-00018
  13. In Re Talbot (1981)

    On November 18, 1980, the defendant in this matter, Patricia Easterly Talbot, along with her husband, filed a voluntary petition seeking relief under the provisions of Chapter 7 of Title 11 of the United States Code. A complaint to determine the dischargeability of a particular debt, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523, was filed by the plaintiff in this matter, Louisiana National Bank of Baton Rouge, hereinafter referred to as "the Bank", on March 17, 1981. A hearing on the complaint was held on [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 80-00497, Adv. No. 81-0029
  14. In Re Dunbar (1989)

    This is a proceeding arising under Title 11 of the United States Code. The United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana has original jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b). By Local Rule 29, under the authority of 28 U.S.C. § 157(a), the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana referred all such cases to the Bankruptcy Judge for the district and ordered the Bankruptcy Judge to exercise all authority permitted by 28 U.S.C. § 157.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 87-01726, Adv. No. 88-0007
  15. In Re Carter Paper Co., Inc. (1998)

    This adversary proceeding seeks, on behalf of Carter Paper Company, Inc. (CPC), debtor in the captioned case, and Frank L. Carter, the purported owner of the debtor, judgment against Martin A. Schott (Schott or Trustee), trustee of the CPC bankruptcy estate, for "intentional and wilful breach of fiduciary duty" to CPC and Carter, in failing either to prosecute or abandon an anti-trust claim (that the plaintiffs allege existed as an estate asset) until after the claim prescribed. The matter [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 90-10449, Adversary No. 96-1038
  16. In Re Black (1998)

    Now before the Court is the objection of J.D.'s Trucking Company ("J.D.'s") to the claim of exemption, pursuant to La.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 13:3881A(2)(d) (West 1991),[1] of Joyce May Black, a/k/a Joyce Black, d/b/a Joyce Black Trucking Company (the "Debtor"), regarding a 1988 International 9379 Centionale Truck (the "Truck").


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 97-10453
  17. In Re Myles (2008)

    Kay Myles and Vanessa Ghoram sued Wells Fargo Bank. N.A. ("Wells Fargo") on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated for alleged misconduct during the plaintiffs' chapter 13 bankruptcy cases.[1] Specifically, the amended complaint asserts state law claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment; damages for violations of 11 U.S.C. § 362; restitution for violating 11 U.S.C. §§ 362, 506, 1322, 1327 and Fed. R. Bankr.P.2016; injunctive relief; and attorneys' fees and costs. Wells [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 06-11116. Adversary No. 07-1148
  18. In Re Dick Henley, Inc. (1984)

    This case comes before the court on a motion for Summary Judgment. The issue is whether a Debtor/Contractor's payment to a Creditor/Subcontractor can be a preferential transfer when, on account of that payment, the Creditor/Subcontractor lost its Private Works Act lien (e.g. mechanic's lien) against the Owner. The facts agreed for these purposes are essentially those stated in the defendant's memorandum of authorities:


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy No. 81-00430, Adv. No. 83-0192
  19. In Re Osborne (2007)

    Debtor Mary Osborne asks the court to sanction Homeside Lending, Inc.[1] and its counsel, Stacy C. Wheat, for alleged misconduct in connection with a motion for relief from automatic stay.[2] The gist of the debtor's complaint is that Homeside's lawyer signed and filed a false affidavit to obtain relief from the automatic stay based on the debtor's alleged failure to comply with the terms of a consent order.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: 99-11735
  20. In Re Burk Development Co., Inc. (1997)

    On December 6, 1989, Burk Development Company, Inc. and Jack and Martha Burk (collectively, "Debtors") filed voluntary petitions for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Court consolidated these cases for administrative purposes. On September 21, 1990, the Court entered an order confirming the Third Amended Plan of Reorganization ("Plan"), filed jointly by the Debtors, which Plan provided for the liquidation of the Debtors' property.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Louisiana Docket: Bankruptcy Nos. 89-11577, 89-11578

1 of 6 Page(s)

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