AFFIRMED lower courts' rulings that state court judgment and sanctions were non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. 523(a)(2)(A) & (a)(6). Court of appeals rejected all grounds raised by the debtor,...
Summarized by Thomas DeCarlo , John Steinberger & Associates, PC
11 years 2 months ago
Citation:
Case No. 14-8004 (6th Cir. BAP 2014)
Ruling:
Bankruptcy Court did not abuse discretion in denying creditor's Motion for Extenstion of Time to file Complaint to object to Discharge under Section 523.
The Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit relied on the persuasive authority from other courts in affirming the district court's and bankruptcy court's findings that a state bar acting in the...
Summarized by David Hercher , U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Oregon
11 years 6 months ago
Citation:
In re Toste, No. EC-13-1266-TaJuKu (9th Cir. B.A.P. Aug. 12, 2014).
Ruling:
A section 523(a)(6) action in a chapter 13 case is not ripe, and the bankruptcy court lacks jurisdiction, if the debtors have not yet sought a hardship discharge. (Not-for-publication memorandum.)
Judge(s):
Laura S. Taylor, Meredith A. Jury, and Frank L. Kurtz, Bankruptcy Judges.
Stuart v. Mendenhall (In re Mendenhall), Case No. 14-10943 (11th Cir. July 22, 2014) (unpublished) (per curiam).
Ruling:
The Eleventh Circuit held that (i) the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in interpreting its order granting a 60 day extension of the Rule 4007(c) deadline to file a complaint to...
No. NC–13–1037–JuKiD (B.A.P. 9th Cir. Mar. 7, 2014)
Ruling:
Affirming the bankruptcy court, the bankruptcy appellate panel held that a creditor’s late-filed nondischargeability complaint did not relate back to its objection to the confirmation of the...
