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

Trustee's objection to exemptions sustained; Debtor's interest in entire trust corpus of trust funded with his own assets included in his bankruptcy estate despite spendthrift and anti-alienation provision. In re Schultz, 324 B.R. 712 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2005).

In re Deborah Renae Smith. Motion to set aside discharge order and motion for expedited hearing denied where debtor wished to set aside discharge order for the sole purpose of extending time within which debtor could rescind her reaffirmation agreement. Insufficient facts alleged which would justify setting aside discharge order under Bankruptcy Rule 9024. Even if additional facts had been alleged, case law does not support setting aside discharge order to permit modification/rescission of reaffirmation agreement once deadline as stated in 11 U.S.C. 524(c)(4) has passed. Not selected for publication.

Debtors are ineligible for chapter 13 under 11 U.S.C. § 109(e) because their unsecured debt included the debt of a corporation the Court found to be the alter ego of Debtor Mark Schutzius; additionally, Debtors' attempt to remove corporate debt from initial schedules by filing an amended plan omitting the corporate debt was a bad faith attempt to create eligibility.Not selected for publication.

Existence of security device which disables vehicle's starter if debtor does not obtain the proper code each month is willful violation of the automatic stay where creditor failed to ensure that debtor in bankruptcy received the proper code each month. Debtor awarded compensatory damages and attorneys' fees; no punitive damages awarded. Hampton v. Yam's Choice Plus Autos, Inc. (In re Hampton)319 B.R. 163 (Bankr. E.D. Ark. 2005)

Judge Richard D. Taylor

Denial of motion to reconsider order dated March 4, 2005.

Debtor is entitled to Arkansas homestead exemption because she is head of household, occupies the property as her home, and is a resident of Arkansas.

In the absence of bad faith, property that came into chapter 13 estate only as a result of § 1306(a), is not property of the estate upon subsequent conversion to chapter 7 case.

Allegations of fraud on the court and the possibility of equitable subordination are questions of fact sufficient to deny the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The Court also found that the doctrine of res judicata was not applicable given the nature of a cash collateral hearing.

Confirmation of chapter 11 plan denied for failure to comply with 11 U.S.C. § 1129 in that the plan failed the best interests of creditors test, discriminated unfairly among classes, violated the absolute priority rule, and included an ambiguous and inappropriate release.

Because a creditor can include certain post-petition fees and charges in its proof of claim, debtor's plan requiring court approval before the creditor includes those charges could not be confirmed.

Pages