The Court found that St. Francis County met its burden of proof under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(3), and the Debtors were, therefore, not entitled to a discharge. The Court also found that St. Francis County, as an unsecured creditor, lacked standing to bring the Complaint to set aside fraudulent transfers under the Bankruptcy Code, and that because the remaining state law fraudulent transfer claims did not have any effect on the administration of the bankruptcy estate, the Court did not have "related to" jurisdiction over the remaining state law fraudulent transfer claims. St. Francis County Farmers Assoc. v. Jerry Wright and Audrey Wright, Wright Land Co. (2:05-ap-1087) and St. Francis County Farmers Assoc. v. Jay Gardner Wright and Mary Rush Wright (2:04-ap-1289) (In re Wright), 353 B.R. 627 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2006). (The two adversary proceedings were consolidated for trial). Affirmed on appeal to the Eastern District of Arkansas.
You are here
Opinions
Notice: Not all of the Judges Opinions will be made available on this site. Individual Judges have the option of specifying that all, some or none of their opinions be posted.
Audrey R. Evans
Court found that IRS was equitably estopped from assessing a tax based on a disallowed loss in the 1982 tax year after it assessed and collected a tax for the 1995 tax year based on the validity of the same loss. Court held 1982 assessment invalid, and directed the IRS to refund Plaintiff’s bankruptcy estate $6,928 in previously withheld tax refunds with interest. Seay v. Internal Revenue Service (In re Seay), 353 B.R.614 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2007).
In the context of the construction business, the Court found that Hydro Temp, who was the supplier of heating and cooling units, met its burden of proof on each of the three elements of the ordinary course of business exception. Based on this finding, the Trustee was not entitled to avoid the transfer (payment for the heating and cooling units) as preferential under 11 U.S.C. § 547(b) for the benefit of the unsecured creditors, and judgment was entered in favor of Hydro Temp. M. Randy Rice v. Hydro Temp Corp. (In re GS Inc.),352 B.R.858 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2006).
Interpreting new § 1328(f) enacted by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, Court determined that § 1328(f)(2) did not bar the Debtor from receiving a discharge in her current Chapter 13 case. Although the Debtor had received a Chapter 13 discharge within two years of the current case’s filing, that discharge was not received in a case filedunder Chapter 13 within two years of the current case’s filing. In re West, 352 B.R. 482 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2006).
Where assignor has a perfected security interest in Certificate of Deposit prior to its assignment, the assignee remains perfected against the creditors and transferres of the original debtor even though the Certificate of Deposit remains in the custody and control of the assignor. In re Fewell, 352 B.R. 98 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2006).
Motion to reopen granted to allow Debtor to receive a discharge where Debtor had filed Official Form 23, Debtor’s Certification of Completion of Instructional Course Concerning Personal Financial Management, after the case had closed without a discharge. However, Court did not grant motion to continue the automatic stay because the automatic stay had expired upon the closing of the case pursuant to § 362(c)(2)(A), and reopening the case does not automatically cause the automatic stay to become effective again. Not selected for publication.
Mr. Angeleri required to show cause why he should not be suspended from practicing law in the Arkansas Bankruptcy Courts in accordance with Local Rule 2090-2 until the Arkansas Supreme Court's Committee on Professional Conduct reaches a decision on the Court's complaint (arising from Judge Evans' April 26, 2006 Opinion and Judge Mixon's referrals in the Binns and Ersery cases).
See April 26, 2006 Bost opinion below.
Mr. Angeleri required to show cause why he should not be suspended from practicing law in the Arkansas Bankruptcy Courts in accordance with Local Rule 2090-2 until the Arkansas Supreme Court's Committee on Professional Conduct reaches a decision on the Court's complaint (arising from Judge Evans' April 26, 2006 Opinion and Judge Mixon's referrals in the Binns and Ersery cases).
See April 26, 2006 Bost opinion below.
Mr. Angeleri required to show cause why he should not be suspended from practicing law in the Arkansas Bankruptcy Courts in accordance with Local Rule 2090-2 until the Arkansas Supreme Court's Committee on Professional Conduct reaches a decision on the Court's complaint (arising from Judge Evans' April 26, 2006 Opinion and Judge Mixon's referrals in the Binns and Ersery cases).
See April 26, 2006 Bost opinion below.
Judge Richard D. Taylor
Court sustained the trustee's objection to the debtors' amended exemptions and granted the trustee's motion for turnover of exempted property where debtors omitted assets from their schedules, violated their oath at the first meeting, and testified to owning unscheduled property.