Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Court Cases

Search
  1. In Re Hill (2010)

    Debtors William Hill and Kathleen Hill ("the Debtors") filed this Chapter 13 case five days after they received a Chapter 7 discharge in a previous case—a sequence of events colloquially described as a "Chapter 20" case. See Grandstaff v. Casey (In re Casey), 428 B.R. 519, 521 (Bankr.S.D.Cal.2010). In their Chapter 20 case, the Debtors seek to confirm their Chapter 13 plan and strip[1] the junior lien of CIT/Vericrest Financial, Inc. ("CIT") against their principal residence pursuant to 11 [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: 09-19516-MM13
  2. In Re Coombs (1996)

    A creditor, Mr. Garcia, has brought an adversary proceeding seeking a judgment denying debtor a discharge under Chapter 7. This proceeding, brought under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a) asks that debtor's discharge be denied pursuant to § 727(a)(2)(A), (a)(2)(B), (a)(4)(A), (a)(4)(B) and (a)(5). The Pretrial Order approved by the Court deleted the allegation under (a)(4)(B) and, at trial, plaintiff abandoned the claim under (a)(5).


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 94-06574-B7. Adversary No. 94-90663-B7
  3. In Re Petruccelli (1990)

    On September 26, 1985 debtor John Petruccelli filed his petition for relief under Chapter 13. His principal debts were tax obligations, the bulk of which were owed to the IRS for income taxes from 1974-1984, and for certain withholding taxes for 1980-1985. Debtor is a practicing attorney. The precipitating events for his bankruptcy filing involved seizures by the State of California of debtor's business and trust accounts, foreclosure on his home, and the freezing of certain assets by the IRS.

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 85-04790-B13
  4. In Re Kaitangian (1998)

    Christine Kaitangian, San Anselmo, CA, Dixie R. Henry, Corrie Ruth Baker, Oceanside, CA, Carolyn A. Camera, Vista, CA, Scott T. & Theresa M. Hansen, Christina M. McMartin, Tillie Sanchez, Oceanside, CA, for Debtor in Pro Per.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy Nos. 96-01692-B7, 96-06354-M7, 96-07367-H7, 96-09272-A7, 96-08789-M7, 96-08788-A7, 96-07639-A7
  5. In Re Casey (2010)

    Creditor Christine Grandstaff has moved for relief from the automatic stay so she can foreclose on her third position trust deed. Debtor has valued the property in her Schedules at $230,000, and according to Grandstaff there is a $218,000 first position note, and a $236,000 second ahead of Grandstaff's third position note for $20,000, which has grown to $30,698. Debtor agrees there is no equity in the property to which Grandstaff's lien may attach, but offers different figures and creditors.

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: 10-00367-LA13
  6. In Re Aneiro (1987)

    Paul Riddle and Clifford Crittendon, as trustees of the Clifford Crittendon Trust ("Riddle and Crittendon" or "Movants"), seek relief from stay to enforce a lease executed by Al Aneiro ("debtor") on January 1, 1986 ("1986 Lease"). Movants seek relief from stay to proceed in state court to secure possession of the leased property or, alternatively, adequate protection in the form of a court order requiring debtor to pay past due common area maintenance charges.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy Nos. 85-00334-P13 RS-1986
  7. In Re Ramirez (1986)

    Marathon Home Loan Company ("Marathon") holds two trust deeds on real property belonging to debtor Mary Ramirez ("Ramirez"), which secure two notes in the amount of $49,000 and $12,000. Ramirez executed the notes in late 1984. Both notes mature within one year of February 7, 1986, the date Ramirez filed her Chapter 13 petition. The notes carry interest rates of 18% and 19%, respectively.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 86-00744-LM13
  8. In Re Geyer (1996)

    Timothy Allen Geyer and Bertha Irene Geyer ("Debtors") seek to void the lien of Commercial Credit Corp., ("CCC") which encumbers their residence. The Debtors move under Bankruptcy Code section 506(d) on the ground that since no equity exists in the residence to secure the claim of CCC, CCC does not have a secured claim. CCC opposes the motion, arguing, that under the holding in Nobelman v. American Savings Bank, 508 U.S. 324, 113 S.Ct. 2106, 124 L.Ed.2d 228 (1993), the Debtors may not modify [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 95-14389-B13
  9. La Jolla Mortg. Fund v. Rancho El Cajon Associates (1982)

    On January 6, 1982, the plaintiff, La Jolla Mortgage Fund ("Fund"), filed this complaint seeking relief from the automatic stay. In the complaint, the Fund claimed that there is no equity in the property, which constitutes the collateral for two notes held by the Fund, and that the property is not necessary for an effective reorganization of the defendant-debtor, Rancho El Cajon Associates ("debtor"). The plaintiff also urged relief on the ground that the debtor had failed to provide adequate [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 81-03370-M11, Complaint No. C82-00026-M
  10. In Re Victorio (2011)

    The Victorios filed a joint Chapter 7 petition on or about October 31, 2007. They listed their house as valued at $455,000, with $448,000 in consensual liens on it. Indymac was scheduled as having the senior lien, of $359,909, and CitiMortgage was listed in junior position at $89,083. The case proceeded routinely, and debtors received their Chapter 7 discharge on or about February 8, 2008.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: 10-07125-LT13
  11. In Re Sounakhene (2000)

    The Trustee moved to modify the chapter 13 plan of debtors, Boon and Thene Sounakhene ("Debtors"), to increase the distribution to general unsecured creditors from 12% to 45%. The basis for the modification is the debtors' alleged failure to comply with the disposable income test of Section 1325(b)(1)(B). Specifically, the Trustee contends the Debtors failed to apply all their disposable income for a period of not less than three years because they made a lump sum prepayment before 36 months [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: 98-15283-A13
  12. In Re Maya (2007)

    The United States Trustee has moved to dismiss this case under both subsections (b)(2) and (b)(3)(B) of 11 U.S.C. § 707. At the center of the motion is whether debtors can include in their "Means Test" calculation payments they would otherwise owe on property they intend to surrender. The United States Trustee says they should not be able to claim those sums as expenses, and if they cannot then a "presumption of abuse" under § 707(b)(2) arises. Alternatively, the United States Trustee urges [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: 07-01561-B7
  13. In Re Nite Lite Inns (1982)

    Nite Lite Inns, a California corporation, filed for relief under Chapter 11 of the Code on December 7, 1979. The major assets of Nite Lite Inns were three hotels located in Ontario, San Diego and National City. The San Diego hotel consists of 156 rooms, 2 banquet rooms and a 14-unit recreational vehicle park. Cost overruns arising out of the construction of the San Diego hotel in 1979 were the major contributing factor to the filing of the reorganization proceeding herein.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 79-03350-K
  14. In Re Salazar (2011)

    US Bank National Association ("US Bank"), Trustee for the C-BASS Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2006-CB2, nonjudicially foreclosed on the residence of Debtor Eleazar Salazar ("Salazar"), by exercising the power of sale under the deed of trust. At the time it foreclosed, U.S. Bank was not the original beneficiary of record, and it had not recorded an assignment of the deed of trust conveying to it an interest in the deed of trust.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: 10-17456-MM13
  15. In Re Maruko Inc. (1997)

    Arnold M. Quittner, Pachulski, Stang, Ziehl & Young, P.C., Los Angeles, CA, Joseph A. Eisenberg, P.C., Adrienne M. Coffin, Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LLP, Los Angeles, CA, Mary Testerman, Office of the U.S. Trustee, San Diego, CA, for Reorganized Debtor/Defendant.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy Nos. 91-12303-A11, 91-12546, 91-13398 and 92-01924
  16. In Re Mills (2000)

    The United States Trustee (the "UST") moves, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 707(b), for an order dismissing the chapter 7 case of Ronald Mills ("Mills" or the "debtor") because the UST contends that granting this debtor a discharge would be a "substantial abuse" of chapter 7. The UST contends that if Mills was not permitted to fund his voluntary 401(k) plan with 10% of his salary or to repay $146 per month toward a loan he had taken out against that plan, he would be able to pay 96% of his debt [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 99-07826-A7
  17. In Re Lochmiller Industries, Inc. (1995)

    The matter before the Court involves issues which are important to all who deal with Chapter 11 debtors, including trade creditors and professionals. In this case, the debtor was unable to reorganize under Chapter 11, and the proceeding was converted to one under Chapter 7. This matter came on for hearing on the noticed motion of the Chapter 7 trustee for an order requiring disgorgement of fees and costs paid to the professionals who served in the pre-conversion Chapter 11 case. In addition, [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 82-04305-B7
  18. In Re Karlovich (2010)

    This rather convoluted bankruptcy case has given rise to a very discreet legal issue—whether, in this post-BAPCPA era, the absolute priority rule applies in a chapter 11 case of an individual. For the reasons set forth below, the Court holds that it does.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: 10-10860-PB11
  19. In Re Morris (1996)

    Plaintiff Elizabeth Bodily (the "Plaintiff") has sued her former husband, James Marvin Morris (the "Debtor"), to have declared non-dischargeable an equalization payment of $8,542.68 which the Superior Court ordered the Debtor to pay the Plaintiff. The equalization payment was intended by that court to equalize the responsibilities for payment of debts as well as the division of property between the parties. The Plaintiff sues for nondischargeability under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15).[1] This is a [...]

    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 95-00335-A7. Adv. No. 95-90116-A7
  20. In Re Beaver (1980)

    On November 6, 1979, Ms. Linda Beaver filed her petition seeking protection under Chapter 13 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, and paid the required $60 filing fee. A first meeting of creditors was held on December 12, 1979. Subsequently, on December 26, 1979, a hearing was held before this Court to determine if the plan should be confirmed. This Court determined that the plan should not be confirmed and this opinion is issued to explain that decision.


    Court: Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California Docket: Bankruptcy No. 79-03046-KZ

1 of 18 Page(s)

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