Search for: "In Re: B.R.-2"
Results 1 - 20
of 568
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Sep 2009, 8:36 am
Ries (In re Carpenter), 408 B.R. 244 (8th Cir.BAP (Minn.)) [read post]
2 Dec 2008, 6:00 am
Therefore allowing the landlord to limit its exposure.In re United Press International, Inc., 55 B.R. 63, 66 (Bankr. [read post]
27 Oct 2013, 7:14 am
In re Gilley, 288 B.R. 901 (Bankr.M.D.Fla.2002). [read post]
22 Feb 2006, 9:27 am
See In re Childs, 335 B.R. 623 (Bankr. [read post]
22 Feb 2006, 9:27 am
See In re Childs, 335 B.R. 623 (Bankr. [read post]
2 Mar 2017, 11:33 am
In re Murrin, 477 B.R. 99, 106 (D. [read post]
10 Apr 2007, 12:00 am
See In re McLaughlin, 183 B.R. 171, 175 (Bankr.W.D.Wis.1995). [read post]
27 Oct 2013, 8:23 am
www.bublicklaw.com In the case of In re Chinchilla, 202 B.R. 1010 (S.D.Fla.1996)(Mark,J.), the debtor moved an award of for his attorney's fees and costs under section 523(d) for the defense of 523(a)(2)(A) fraud claim filed against him. [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 1:51 pm
In re McNeal, at *2. [read post]
11 Jun 2007, 12:15 pm
In re Gosman, 282 B.R. 45 (Bankr. [read post]
9 May 2014, 12:57 pm
In re Pérez Hernández, 487 B.R. 353 (Bankr. [read post]
20 Feb 2006, 1:33 pm
In In re Montoya, 333 B.R. 449 (Bankr. [read post]
16 Jan 2017, 9:41 am
From our neighbors to the west in Alabama, the issue before the Court in In re Atchison, 557 B.R. 818 (Bankr. [read post]
13 May 2011, 8:59 am
In In re Young Broadcasting, Inc., et al., 430 B.R. 99 (Bankr. [read post]
13 May 2011, 8:59 am
In In re Young Broadcasting, Inc., et al., 430 B.R. 99 (Bankr. [read post]
17 Jun 2014, 8:08 am
In In re Physiotherapy Holdings, Inc., 506 B.R. 619 (Bankr. [read post]
4 Aug 2007, 3:01 am
One was represented by In re Hardacre, 338 B.R. 718 (N.D.Tex.2006) and In re McGuire, 342 B.R. 608 (Bankr.W.D.Mo. 2006), which held that a debtor cannot deduct an ownership expense for a vehicle he owns free and clear in both the chapter 13 and 7 contexts. [read post]
28 Aug 2006, 10:28 am
Avianca, 345 B.R. 120 (Bkrtcy. [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]
13 May 2014, 2:35 pm
B.R. was 2 months old and didn’t have a choice about whether to go to the drug house or stay home. [read post]
