Source: https://opinions.abi.org/8th-circuit/iowa/northern-district/judge-edmonds
Timestamp: 2020-01-29 01:20:28
Document Index: 781563528

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 727', '§ 523', '§ 284', '§ 283', '§ 157', '§ 727', '§ 523', '§ 523', '§ 523', '§ 523']

Judge Edmonds | Collier Case Updates
Home Jurisdiction 8th Circuit (1341) Iowa (260) Northern District (207) 8th Circuit Iowa Northern District Judge Edmonds
Lahaie v. Lahaie (In re Lahaie)
Before the court was the final trial of the plaintiff creditor's complaint objecting to the bankruptcy discharge of defendant debtor pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 727(a)(2), (a)(4)(A). The creditor contended that debtor had concealed property or made a false oath with intent to defraud creditors by her failure to disclose four categories of property and other information in the schedules or other documents filed with her bankruptcy petition.
Read more about Lahaie v. Lahaie (In re Lahaie)
Debtor's mistaken failure to schedule property items or transfer was not grounds for denial of discharge.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Lahaie v. Lahaie (In re Lahaie). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on July 22,2010, LexisNexis #1110-026
Debtors sought confirmation of their second modified plan under chapter 13. The trustee objected to confirmation.
Confirmation denied due to discriminatory treatment of creditors.
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on December 18,2009, LexisNexis #0110-096
Monsanto Co. v. Roeder (In re Roeder)
Plaintiff seed producer sought a determination that defendant debtor's liability for patent infringement was a nondischargeable debt for willful and malicious injury within the meaning of 11 U.S.C.S. § 523(a)(6). The seed producer also asked for damages and attorney fees calculated pursuant to 35 U.S.C.S. §§ 284 and 285, and a permanent injunction under 35 U.S.C.S. § 283.
Read more about Monsanto Co. v. Roeder (In re Roeder)
Damages for debtor's infringement of creditor's seed patent was nondischargeable.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Monsanto Co. v. Roeder (In re Roeder). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on December 14,2009, LexisNexis #0110-019
In re Augustine
Read more about In re Augustine
The matter before the court was the disposition of the proceeds of an asset disclosed to the trustee after the chapter 13 debtors were discharged and the case was closed. Debtors' motion asked that the funds be distributed to them. The standing trustee resisted and asked the court to allow distribution to creditors.
Balance of proceeds of products liability action was property of the estate.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Augustine. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on December 07,2009, LexisNexis #0110-102
Forker v. Craney (In re Craney)
Read more about Forker v. Craney (In re Craney)
In a core proceeding under 28 U.S.C.S. § 157(b)(2)(J), plaintiff trustee sought revocation of each of defendant debtors' discharge under 11 U.S.C.S. § 727(d)(2).
Discharge revoked due to debtor's failure to turn over monthly annuity payments to trustee.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Forker v. Craney (In re Craney). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on June 15,2009, LexisNexis #0809-032
Little Family Farms co. v. Mortensen (In re Mortensen)
Plaintiff creditor filed an adversary proceeding against defendant debtor seeking a determination that its debt was nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C.S. § 523(a)(2)(A), § 523(a)(4), or § 523(a)(6).
Read more about Little Family Farms co. v. Mortensen (In re Mortensen)
Construction loan debt was nondischargeable due to debtor's embezzlement of funds for personal use.
Court: Southern District of Iowa ( Edmonds ) [ Bankruptcy Court ]
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Little Family Farms co. v. Mortensen (In re Mortensen). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on March 17,2009, LexisNexis #0609-007
In re Horras
Read more about In re Horras
Plaintiff, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) filed a complaint seeking a determination that a debt owed to it by defendant debtor, a former executive in the health services industry, be excepted from discharge for fraud and as a fine or penalty under 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 523(a)(2)(A) and 523(a)(7) respectively. The debtor moved to dismiss the complaint filed as not timely filed under former Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007(c).
Time limit for filing dischargeability complaint is not jurisdictional.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Horras. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on January 30,2009, LexisNexis #0409-026
United States v. Horras (In re Horras)
Read more about United States v. Horras (In re Horras)
Defendant debtor moved to dismiss a complaint filed by plaintiff, the United States, to except from discharge per 11 U.S.C.S. 523 debtor's obligation to the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), including a monetary penalty, resulting from the submission of false or fraudulent reimbursement claims by a health care provider owned and controlled by debtor. At issue was whether the complaint was time-barred by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007(c).
Deadline for filing dischargeability proceeding was not jurisdictional and could be extended.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of United States v. Horras (In re Horras). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on January 30,2009, LexisNexis #0309-105
In re Lundeen
Read more about In re Lundeen
The husband and wife debtors moved to modify their chapter 13 plan after confirmation. The standing trustee did not object, nor did any other party-in-interest. Nonetheless, the court held hearing on the motion.
Debtor could not modify plan to justify unauthorized use of tax refunds.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Lundeen. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member
Consumer case opionion summary, case decided on December 12,2008, LexisNexis #0209-069