11 U.S.C. § 541

84 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• A.H. Robins Co. v. Piccinin
  788 F.2d 994· 4th Cir.· 1986-04-10 ·cited 104×
  The court held that bankruptcy courts have broad power to enjoin suits against non-debtors when such suits could affect the bankruptcy estate, either under statutory provisions like 11 U.S.C. § 362 and § 105, or under general equitable powers.
• In re Mason v. Integrity Ins. Co. & Sherwood & Roberts, Inc.
  709 F.2d 1313· 9th Cir.· 1983-07-06 ·cited 83×
  The court held that an order for relief in an involuntary bankruptcy proceeding is a final, appealable order, and that the debtor waived his right to object to the order based on an insufficient number of petitioning creditors.
• In re Thomas v. Thomas
  883 F.2d 991· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-15 ·cited 70×
  The court held that SouthTrust's lien on the mobile home was not voided by the debtors' Chapter 13 plan confirmation, and SouthTrust was entitled to relief from the stay to pursue its detinue action.
• In re Bialac v. Bialac
  712 F.2d 426· 9th Cir.· 1983-08-04 ·cited 56×
  A pre-foreclosure right to redeem collateral, even if held by a debtor with only a fractional interest, constitutes 'property of the estate' protected by the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362.
• Koch Refining v. Farmers Union Cent. Exch., Inc.
  831 F.2d 1339· 7th Cir.· 1987-10-07 ·cited 50×
  The court held that a trustee may maintain an alter ego action against member-owners and that the oil companies meet constitutional standing requirements.
• In re McMANUS v. Avco Fin. Servs. of La., Inc.
  681 F.2d 353· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-26 ·cited 43×
  The dissent argues that 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) is available to a Louisiana debtor to avoid a nonpossessory, nonpurchase-money security interest in household goods, despite state law. The dissent believes federal law, under the supremacy clause, overrides state policy on waiver of exe
• E.F. Hutton & Co., Inc. v. Hadley
  901 F.2d 979· 11th Cir.· 1990-05-21 ·cited 40×
  A bankruptcy trustee lacks standing to assert claims belonging to specific customer creditors when those claims are not owed to the bankrupt estate itself.
• In re Davis
  730 F.2d 176· 5th Cir.· 1984-03-30 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the asbestos workers failed to demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to extraordinary relief from the bankruptcy court's stay orders, and that adequate alternative remedies were available.
• MacARTHUR Co. & W. MacArthur Co. v. Johns-Manville Corp.
  837 F.2d 89· 2d Cir.· 1988-01-19 ·cited 36×
  The Bankruptcy Court had jurisdiction over the insurance policies as property of the debtor's estate and the authority to issue injunctive orders channeling third-party claims to settlement proceeds.
• In re State OF Mo. v. U. S. Bankr. Court FOR the E. D. OF Ark. & the Hon. Charles W. Baker
  647 F.2d 768· 8th Cir.· 1981-04-08 ·cited 36×
  The bankruptcy court has exclusive jurisdiction over the grain and warehouses, and state proceedings to enforce pecuniary interests are stayed.
• In re Kaiser
  791 F.2d 73· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-13 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the land and utilitarian personal property were part of the bankrupt estate, but the ownership of decorative items required further hearing.
• In re Jones
  768 F.2d 923· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-26 ·cited 24×
  A district judge's practice of issuing a written opinion only after a notice of appeal is filed is discouraged as it can impede the appellate process and potentially encourage unnecessary appeals.
• In re Smith
  640 F.2d 888· 7th Cir.· 1981-02-17 ·cited 22×
  A debtor's cause of action for violations of the Truth in Lending Act and similar state statutes is 'property' that may be claimed as exempt under 11 U.S.C. § 522(d)(5).
• Sumy v. Schlossberg
  777 F.2d 921· 4th Cir.· 1985-11-21 ·cited 21×
  Entireties property owned by a debtor and non-filing spouse is not exempt under § 522(b)(2)(B) to the extent that debts are owed jointly to creditors, and the trustee may administer such property for the benefit of joint creditors under § 363(h).
• In re Compton Corp. v. Blue Quail Energy, Inc.
  831 F.2d 586· 5th Cir.· 1987-11-12 ·cited 20×
  A creditor cannot use a letter of credit to secure payment of an unsecured antecedent debt, as this constitutes an indirect preferential transfer recoverable by the bankruptcy trustee.
• Shearson Lehman Hutton, Inc. v. Wagoner
  944 F.2d 114· 2d Cir.· 1991-09-18 ·cited 18×
  The trustee has standing to pursue the churning claim, and the district court erred in dismissing it based on the statute of limitations or waiver, as these issues are for the arbitrators to decide.
• In re Saylors v. Saylors
  869 F.2d 1434· 11th Cir.· 1989-04-10 ·cited 18×
  A chapter 13 plan may cure a home mortgage arrearage even after the debtor received a chapter 7 discharge of the underlying debt, as the debt transforms into a nonrecourse obligation and the debtor retains equitable redemption rights.
• United States v. Devall
  704 F.2d 1513· 11th Cir.· 1983-05-16 ·cited 18×
  The Social Security Administration is required to comply with bankruptcy court income deduction orders for Chapter 13 debtors' social security benefits.
• In re Atl. Bus. & Cmty. Corp. v. Atl. Bus. & Cmty. Dev. Corp.
  901 F.2d 325· 3d Cir.· 1990-04-18 ·cited 16×
  A debtor's possessory interest in property, even under a tenancy at sufferance, is protected by the automatic stay, and intentional interference with that interest constitutes a willful violation warranting damages.
• In re Computer Commc'ns, Inc. v. Codex Corp.
  824 F.2d 725· 9th Cir.· 1987-08-07 ·cited 16×
  The court held that Codex violated the automatic stay provision of the Bankruptcy Code by unilaterally terminating its contract with CCI without seeking relief from the bankruptcy court.
• Murray Drabkin v. Dist. OF Columbia
  824 F.2d 1102· D.C. Cir.· 1987-07-24 ·cited 15×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority erred in its interpretation of section 547 of the Bankruptcy Code and its legislative history regarding tax payments.
• In re Bobroff v. Cont'l Bank
  766 F.2d 797· 3d Cir.· 1985-07-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court correctly determined it lacked jurisdiction over the debtor's tort action because the claims were not 'related to' the bankruptcy estate, as the debtor's attempted conversion to Chapter 13 was void.
• In re Schwartz v. United States
  954 F.2d 569· 9th Cir.· 1992-01-22 ·cited 13×
  Violations of the Bankruptcy Code's automatic stay provision are void, not merely voidable.
• Cross Elec. Co., Inc. v. United States
  664 F.2d 1218· 4th Cir.· 1981-11-24 ·cited 13×
  An account receivable levied upon by the IRS prior to a debtor filing for bankruptcy is not property of the bankruptcy estate.
• Paul v. Monts
  906 F.2d 1468· 10th Cir.· 1990-06-28 ·cited 12×
  A Chapter 7 trustee can pursue a breach of contract claim against a proposed participant in a failed Chapter 11 reorganization plan, and the Bankruptcy Code's enforcement provisions do not preempt such a claim.
• In re Titan Energy v. Titan Energy, Inc.
  837 F.2d 325· 8th Cir.· 1988-01-19 ·cited 12×
  The bankruptcy court has jurisdiction over National Union's action concerning insurance policies that are property of the debtor's estate, but abstention is appropriate because the issues are primarily state law matters with only a peripheral impact on the estate.
• In re Lewis W. Shurtleff, Inc. v. Frontier Properties/LP 102/Meadow Glen Arms/79
  778 F.2d 1416· 9th Cir.· 1985-12-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the transfer of the apartments constituted 'property of the debtor' and occurred within the 90-day preference period, but remanded for further factfinding regarding whether the transfer enabled the transferees to receive more than they would have in a Chapter
• Borman v. Raymark Indus., Inc.
  946 F.2d 1031· 3d Cir.· 1991-10-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(1) applies to appeals against a debtor, even if a supersedeas bond was posted before bankruptcy, and that the prior ruling in Mid-Jersey is no longer applicable under the current Bankruptcy Code.
• In re Howard's Appliance Corp. v. Howard's Appliance Corp.
  874 F.2d 88· 2d Cir.· 1989-04-25 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a constructive trust imposed under New Jersey law in favor of Sanyo grants Sanyo an interest in the collateral superior to that of the debtor-in-possession, notwithstanding the debtor's strong-arm powers under Section 544.
• In re Energy Res. Co., Inc. v. Energy Res. Co., Inc.
  871 F.2d 223· 1st Cir.· 1989-03-31 ·cited 10×
  A bankruptcy court has the legal authority to order the IRS to apply tax payments made by a Chapter 11 debtor to the corporation's "trust fund" tax liabilities first, even if the IRS considers such payments "involuntary."
• Roy v. Creasy
  763 F.2d 656· 4th Cir.· 1985-06-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a bankruptcy removal petition is timely if any defendant meets the thirty-day removal requirement, and that district courts have jurisdiction over bankruptcy matters, including pension fund disputes, under the 1984 Act.
• Slater v. U.S. Steel Corp.
  820 F.3d 1193· 11th Cir.· 2016-02-24 ·cited 9×
  The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment to U.S. Steel, barring Sandra Slater's employment discrimination claims on the grounds of judicial estoppel. The court found that Slater's failure to list the lawsuit as a contingent asset on her bankrup
• In re Rigden v. Aldrich
  795 F.2d 727· 9th Cir.· 1986-07-24 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the standard of care for bankruptcy trustees in corporate debtor cases should be the deferential business judgment rule, analogous to nonbankruptcy management.
• In re Tucson Ests., Inc. v. Tucson Ests., Inc.
  912 F.2d 1162· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court abused its discretion by reimposing the stay on state litigation, as state law governed the issues and abstention was appropriate. The cross-appeal regarding judgment recordation was deemed moot.
• In re Carroll v. Tri-Growth Ctr. City, Ltd.
  903 F.2d 1266· 9th Cir.· 1990-05-23 ·cited 8×
  The management agreement is property of the estate and protected by the automatic stay, thus Tri-Growth's termination without seeking relief from the stay was a violation.
• In re Cont'l AIR Lines, Inc. v. Cont'l AIR Lines, Inc.
  780 F.2d 1223· 5th Cir.· 1986-01-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a debtor-in-possession cannot use Section 363(b) to effectively create terms of a reorganization plan, and the lower court erred by not considering whether creditors were denied protections afforded by a formal plan.
• Begley v. Philadelphia Elec. Co.
  760 F.2d 46· 3d Cir.· 1985-04-19 ·cited 8×
  Section 366 of the Bankruptcy Code does not preempt state public utility regulations requiring an opportunity to amortize post-petition arrearages before termination of service in a Chapter 7 proceeding.
• Shirkey v. Leake
  715 F.2d 859· 4th Cir.· 1983-08-23 ·cited 8×
• In re Yonikus
  996 F.2d 866· 7th Cir.· 1993-06-08 ·cited 7×
  A debtor's fraudulent concealment of an asset from the bankruptcy estate constitutes bad faith and is grounds for denying an exemption in that asset, even if the asset might otherwise be considered exempt.
• In re Johnson v. Finnman
  960 F.2d 396· 4th Cir.· 1992-03-26 ·cited 7×
  The bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to determine the beneficiaries and distribute a constructive trust, and parties can waive objections to jurisdiction by failing to raise them timely.
• Riggs Nat'l Bank OF Wash. v. Perry
  729 F.2d 982· 4th Cir.· 1984-03-16 ·cited 7×
  The court held that while a due-on-bankruptcy clause alone is not cause to lift the automatic stay, the debtor's lack of equity in property requires the court to grant relief from the stay unless adequate protection is provided.
• In re Koreag v. Refco F/X Assocs., Inc.
  961 F.2d 341· 2d Cir.· 1992-04-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a threshold determination of property ownership under local law is required before a bankruptcy court can order turnover of assets ancillary to a foreign proceeding under 11 U.S.C. § 304(b)(2).
• In re Lockard v. Lockard
  884 F.2d 1171· 9th Cir.· 1989-09-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the state court's unsigned minute entry order was not sufficiently final or appealable to have preclusive effect, and that the contractor's license bond was not property of the bankruptcy estate, thus the automatic stay did not apply to the action against the
• Cntys. Contracting & Constr. Co. v. Constitution Life Ins. Co.
  855 F.2d 1054· 3d Cir.· 1988-08-31 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the automatic stay provision of the Bankruptcy Code does not toll the expiration of an insurance policy's grace period, but section 108(b) extends it by 60 days, and the debtor must affirmatively assume an executory contract under section 365.
• In re Jack G. Brooks, M.D. v. Interfirst Bank
  844 F.2d 258· 5th Cir.· 1988-05-10 ·cited 6×
  A doctor's interest in an ERISA pension plan established by his professional association is not a spendthrift trust protected from creditors if the doctor, along with other members, partially owns and controls the association and contributes to the plan.
• Ethan Allen Turshen for James Louis Chapman v. Chapman
  823 F.2d 836· 4th Cir.· 1987-07-24 ·cited 6×
  The court held that tax refunds received by a debtor post-petition are property of the bankruptcy estate and must be turned over, and that a prior unappealed bankruptcy court ruling on a trustee's conduct bars relitigation of the same issue for damages.
• In re Tonry v. Bankruptcy
  724 F.2d 467· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an attorney's contingent fee contracts, where legal services remain to be performed, are nonassumable executory contracts and thus not part of the bankruptcy estate.
• In re Colonial Realty Co. v. Hal M. Hirsch
  980 F.2d 125· 2d Cir.· 1992-11-20 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the FDIC's action to recover fraudulently transferred assets is subject to the automatic stay of 11 U.S.C. § 362, as it constitutes an action to recover a claim against the debtor, and the FDIC's statutory rights do not implicitly repeal or limit the automatic
• In re Prudential Lines Inc. v. PSS S.S. Co., Inc.
  928 F.2d 565· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-20 ·cited 5×
  The court held that a Net Operating Loss (NOL) carryforward attributable to a bankrupt subsidiary is property of the subsidiary's bankruptcy estate, and the parent company cannot take a worthless stock deduction that would eliminate the NOL's value to the estate.
• In re FCX, Inc. v. FCX, Inc.
  853 F.2d 1149· 4th Cir.· 1988-08-11 ·cited 5×
  The court held that 11 U.S.C. § 1123(a)(5)(D) allows a debtor to surrender collateral, such as patronage certificates, to satisfy a secured claim, overriding restrictive non-bankruptcy law. The court also held that valuing the certificates at face value for immediate setoff meets