In re Roach, Case No. 08-20667

Debtors filed Chapter 7 case and a non-residential real property lease between Debtors and Creditor was deemed rejected under § 365(d)(4)(A)(I). Subsequently, Debtors converted their case to one under Chapter 13. Creditor filed an application for administrative expense claim for rent arrears that accrued between the filing of the Chapter 7 petition and the lease rejection. Court denied Creditor’s Application for Administrative Expense Claim based on statutory interpretation of §§ 348 & 365. Section 348(d) does not apply to a Chapter 7 to 13 conversion and the interplay of the plain language of §§ 348(c) & 365(d)(3) does not allow for an administrative expense claim.

Date of opinion: 12/23/08

Click here for full opinion.

n re Dawson, Case No. 06-30322; Adversary Case No. 07-3027

Creditor's purported lien on vehicle purchased in Arkansas but located in Missouri as of the petition date was unperfected because, under Mo. Rev. Stat. 301.600(a)(2)(B), three-month grace period for vehicles perfected outside of Missouri did not apply where evidence showed that the parties understood that vehicle was to remain in Missouri.

Date of opinion: 2/14/08


Full opinion click here.

In re Vantage Investments, Inc.

Description: Debtor ′ s objection to deficiency claim sustained in part and overruled in part. Court disallows claim for real estate taxes paid and expenditures incurred for repairs made to real property after a foreclosure sale. Court found claimant had an oral assignment of the necessary loan documents, but that there was insufficient evidence regarding when the assignment occurred to find that it held the loan documents at the time the taxes were paid or expenditures made for the repairs. Absent being the note holder when making expenditures related to property purchased at a foreclosure sale, the purchaser takes the property "as is." Court found claimant foreclosed real and personal property together pursuant to Mo.Rev.Stat.section 400.9-604(a)(2), thus, Part 6 of Article 9 of the UCC was inapplicable and debtor ′ s multiple claims for affirmative relief were unfounded.

Date of opinion: 3/14/08

Full opinion click here.

Dains v. Dains (In re Dains), Case No. 07-2038

Description: Plaintiff brought claims for nondischargeability for false representation and willful and malicious injury to property under 532(a)(2) & (a)(6). Court denied these claims based on Plaintiff ′ s failure to meet her burden of proof on the elements of fraud by a preponderance of evidence and her failure to establish that Debtor willfully and maliciously injured the property. Plaintiff also sought denial of discharge for Debtor ′ s alleged concealment of property with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud creditors and for his making a false oath or account under 727(a)(2)(A) and (a)(4)(A). Court also denied these claims based on Plaintiff ′ s failure to prove each of the elements of the applicable claim by a preponderance of evidence. Court also denied Debtor ′ s counterclaim for attorney ′ s fees under 523(d) due to fact debt at issue was not a consumer debt.

Date of the opinion: 3/24/08

For full opinion click here.

STEVEN KETH MOWRIS and MARILYN SUE MOWRIS,Case No. 07-61100

Above-median Chapter 7 debtors are not permitted take a deduction on the means test for payments on loans against retirement accounts.

Date of opinion: 3/17/08

Click here for the full opinion.

Capital One Auto Fin. v. Osborn, No. 07-1726

The hanging paragraph in 11 U.S.C. section 1325 does not eliminate an under-secured creditor's deficiency claim when, in a Chapter 13 plan, debtors propose to surrender a car purchased within 910 days before filing for bankruptcy. The creditor is entitled to an unsecured deficiency claim if there is a right to a deficiency judgment under state law.

Full opinion Capital One vs. Osborn

Benn vs. Cole 06-2217

Tax refunds are not exempt and therefore may be seized by trustees.

Date of decision: 7/10/07

Full opinion click here.

Neeson v. Sallie Mae, Inc., et al.

Description: Court sustains Debtor ′ s request to discharge student loan indebtedness as undue hardship pursuant to 11 U.S.C. section 523(a)(8). Debtor s current income barely sufficient to meet extremely modest expenses, which are likely understated given demonstrated need to resort to credit card debt to pay expenses and identified unmet needs. Employment history and Debtor ′ s diagnosed personality disorder and limited intelligence indicate that situation not likely to change in foreseeable future.

Date of decision: 2/12/08

For the full opinion click here.

In re Burden, Case No. 07-50366

Debtors could not claim "means test" deductions for payments on debts secured by two pieces of property they intend to surrender. In the absence of these deductions, the Debtors have sufficient disposable income to trigger the presumption of abuse under section 707(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Date of the decision: 12/20/07

Full opinion click here.

In re Woods, Case No. 07-41123

Debtor's objection to secured creditor's request for allowance of fees, costs and expenses sustained in part and overruled in part. The Court found the total request of $560,819, an amount amassed in a little over four months, unreasonable under the circumstances and a case of overreaching. The Court reviewed pre-petition attorney's fees for reasonableness pursuant to language contained in the parties' contract and Missouri law, and the post-petition fees pursuant to section 506(b). The Court disallowed or reduced certain fees, costs and expenses for reasons including lack of specificity in time entry, lumping of numerous tasks, duplication of effort and a general inability by the Court to determine whether time billed was reasonable for the tasks listed.

Date of decision: 12/27/2007

Full opinion click here.

Craig Matthew Frederickson, Debtor, David D. Coop, Trustee-Appellant. v. Craig Matthew Frederickson, Dbtr-Appellee. Case No.07-6025

Above-median debtor whose projected disposable income is negative is not required to propose a plan that runs five years, and the bankruptcy court did not err in confirming a 48-month plan. Dissenting opinion by Judge Federman, MOW.

Date of the decision: 8/15/07

Full opinion click here.

Article regarding this case.

Bank of Iberia vs. Troy and Denise Jeffries - Adversary No: 07-2020

Description: Court denies complaint for nondischargability under 727(a)(2) but grants complaint under 523(a)(6). Plaintiff alleged that Debtor intentionally damaged its collateral. The Court found that Debtor s destruction or misuse of fully-encumbered property (and property with no equity) does not warrant denying him a general discharge under section 727 of the Bankruptcy Code because such an act does not harm the unsecured creditors whom the section seeks to protect. However, based on the evidence introduced by Plaintiff and the lack of any credible explanation from Debtor, the Court found that Plaintiff established that the damage was done with a wilful and malicious intent to injure Plaintiff and that it should therefore be nondischargeable pursuant to section 523(a)(6).

Date of decision: 10/16/07

Full opinion click here.

Laquita Joy Rollins. Case No. 07-50276

Debtor engaged in credit counseling profession could not claim "tool of trade" exemption in certificate of deposit required by state for Debtor to receive immediate payment for services rendered to clients.

Date of decision: 8/17/07

For full opinion click here.

Havens Steel Co. v. Driscoll/Hunt (In re Havens Steel): Adversary No. 07-4067

Portion of creditor's claim attributable to invalid "pass-through" claims disallowed.

Date of decision: 10/9/07

Full opinion click here.

In re Brown, Case No. 07-2010

Description: Court evaluated Debtor's past, present and reasonably reliable future financial resources; Debtor's reasonable and necessary living expenses; and other relevant factors and unique circumstances, including Debtor's failure to participate in the Income Contingent Repayment Program and found that repayment of Debtor's student loan indebtedness to Creditor would impose an undue hardship on her pursuant to 11 U.S.C. section 523(a)(8) and it was therefore dischargeable.

Date of decision: 11/13/07

Full opinion click here.

In re VIKKI J. NICKERSON - Case No. 07-41889

If the effect of section 522(b)(3)'s domiciliary requirements is to render a debtor ineligible for any state's exemptions because the domiciliary state has opted out of the federal exemption scheme and does not permit non-residents from claiming the state's exemptions, the debtor may elect to exempt property under section 522(d).

Date of decision: 9/7/07

Full opinion here.

In re SHANTE LaSHELL RIDING - Case No. 07-42368

Following the Eighth Circuit BAP's decision in In re Frederickson, the Court deviates from its prior interpretation of "projected disposable income" under section 1325(b), and adopts a mechanical application of the numbers from Form 22C to determine whether a plan can be confirmed. Hence, the Court may no longer consider the debtor's actual circumstances for plan confirmation purposes.

Date of decision: 10/30/07

Full opinion here.