Search for: "In Re: B.R.-2" Results 441 - 460 of 570
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
18 May 2009, 8:11 am
Mass 1992); In re Edwards, 228 B.R. 552 (Bankr. [read post]
24 Apr 2009, 2:59 am
--Court: United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of TexasOpinion Date: 2/26/09Cite: In re Pilgrim's Pride, 401 B.R. 229 (N.D. [read post]
4 Apr 2009, 7:47 pm
For these reasons, Dana, as Trustee, of either a land trust or a trust, was required to comply with section 737.403(2), when Dana gifted the Brigham Tree Farm Property to himself. [read post]
25 Feb 2009, 6:30 am
E.g., In re LCS Homes, Inc., 103 B.R. 736 (E.D.Va. 1989)(Virginia law); Hewitt v. [read post]
18 Dec 2008, 8:11 am
Petro (In re Petro), 395 B.R. 369 (B.A.P. 6th Cir. 2008), remand is necessary because bankruptcy court did not consider that "projected disposable income" is different from "disposable income" and surrender of collateral through plan may change entitlement of unsecured creditors. [read post]
3 Dec 2008, 1:10 pm
  After a thorough analysis, the Eleventh Circuit  panel held that § 303(b) were jurisdictional based upon binding precedent in In re All Media Properties, Inc., 646 F.2d 193 (5th Cir. 1981), aff’g 5 B.R. 126 (Bankr. [read post]
2 Dec 2008, 6:00 am by Doug Cornelius
Therefore allowing the landlord to limit its exposure.In re United Press International, Inc., 55 B.R. 63, 66 (Bankr. [read post]
2 Dec 2008, 6:00 am by Doug Cornelius
Therefore allowing the landlord to limit its exposure.In re United Press International, Inc., 55 B.R. 63, 66 (Bankr. [read post]
19 Nov 2008, 8:16 pm
In re Mid-Atlantic Handling Sys., LLC, 304 B.R. at 130 (citing In re Ice Cream Liquidation, Inc., 281 B.R. at 165). [read post]
31 Oct 2008, 8:19 pm
At least two bankruptcy court judges sitting in Massachusetts have permitted such bifurcations, see In re Brown, 175 B.R. 129 and In re Richards, 151 B.R. 8. [read post]
10 Oct 2008, 12:41 am
., In Re Harnischfeger Industries, Inc, 288 B.R. 79, 85 (Bkrtcy.D.Del.2003); Friedman v. [read post]