11 U.S.C. § 547

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

• WJM, Inc. v. Mass. Dep't OF Pub. Welf.
  840 F.2d 996· 1st Cir.· 1988-02-24 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the Department of Public Welfare waived its Eleventh Amendment immunity by filing proofs of claim in the nursing homes' bankruptcy proceedings, but erred in awarding prejudgment interest as there was no express waiver for interest.
• Delgado OIL Co., Inc. v. Torres
  785 F.2d 857· 10th Cir.· 1986-03-05 ·cited 24×
  The filing of a bankruptcy petition deprives the district court of subject matter jurisdiction over actions to recover preferential transfers, vesting exclusive jurisdiction in the bankruptcy court.
• 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.
• 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
• In re Baker & Getty Fin. Servs., Inc. v. Carl D. Rafoth for Baker & Getty Fin. Servs., Inc.
  974 F.2d 712· 6th Cir.· 1992-09-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that Cordek was a principal maker of the note, not an accommodation maker, and affirmed that the Bank's claim should not be equitably subordinated. The court also affirmed the recovery of preferential transfers, holding that the preference period is calculated from
• In re Harbour v. Perkinson
  840 F.2d 1165· 4th Cir.· 1988-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge held that the Perkinsons are entitled to a trial by jury because the trustee's claims, both under federal law for preferences and fraudulent transfers and under state law for voluntary conveyances, are historically legal actions seeking money judgments.
• In re Gulino v. Gulino
  779 F.2d 546· 9th Cir.· 1985-12-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the transferees' possession of the real property perfected the transfer at the time of the sale, making it effective outside the 90-day preference period, even though the deed was recorded later.
• Mortgageamerica Corp. v. Bache Halsey Stuart Shields Inc.
  789 F.2d 1146· 5th Cir.· 1986-05-16 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the district court did not err in applying Bankruptcy Rule 8010 retroactively and dismissing issues not properly briefed, nor did it err in refusing to consider the voidable transfer issue raised for the first time on appeal.
• Stein v. Miller
  158 B.R. 876· S.D. Fla.· 1993-08-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that defendants in bankruptcy adversary proceedings for preferential and fraudulent transfers are entitled to a jury trial before an Article III court, but dispositive motions can be heard by the bankruptcy court.
• In re Salem Mortg. Co. v. Owsianowski
  791 F.2d 456· 6th Cir.· 1986-05-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to meet the burden of showing justification for their oversight in signing a stipulation.
• In re Muncrief v. MT. Prospect State Bank
  900 F.2d 1220· 8th Cir.· 1990-04-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court's finding of debtor insolvency was not clearly erroneous, and the bankruptcy court clearly erred in finding the debtor solvent.
• In re Cal. Trade Tech. Schs., Inc. v. United States
  923 F.2d 641· 9th Cir.· 1991-01-10 ·cited 2×
  Funds deposited into a trust account as restitution become valid trust funds, but if those deposits occur within the preference period, they can be avoidable preferences if they consist of the debtor's own property.
• Bustop Shelters OF Louisville, Inc. v. Classic Homes, Inc.
  914 F.2d 810· 6th Cir.· 1990-09-20 ·cited 2×
  A bankruptcy court does not abuse its discretion by refusing to allow a debtor to place a creditor in a separate class solely to obtain confirmation of a reorganization plan, and a creditor's claim is not impaired if the debtor's obligation remains unaltered.
• Carrier Corp. v. Mid Corp. (In Re Daikin Miami Overseas
  65 B.R. 396· S.D. Fla.· 1986-07-18 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion in denying Carrier's motion to vacate the default judgment, as Carrier failed to demonstrate excusable neglect or a meritorious defense.
• Seidle v. Gatx Leasing Corp.
  45 B.R. 327· S.D. Fla.· 1984-11-14 ·cited 2×
  The court held that payments made by a debtor to an aircraft financer within ninety days of bankruptcy filing were not avoidable preferences because they were authorized by a post-petition stipulation under 11 U.S.C. § 1110 and the debtor was estopped from challenging them.
• In re David Wayne Coppie & Betty Ann Coppie
  728 F.2d 951· 7th Cir.· 1984-03-01 ·cited 2×
  Garnishment of wages within ninety days of bankruptcy, pursuant to an order issued more than ninety days prior, does not constitute a preferential transfer under Indiana law.
• In re Auto-Train Corp., Inc. v. Midland-Ross Corp.
  810 F.2d 270· D.C. Cir.· 1987-01-30 ·cited 1×
  The court held that the nunc pro tunc consolidation order was improper because it prejudiced a creditor who relied on the separate credit of the debtor entity, and the notice provided was inadequate to inform the creditor of the retroactive effect.
• Atlas Mach. & Iron Works v. Bethlehem Steel Corp.
  986 F.2d 709· 4th Cir.· 1993-02-22
  The court affirmed the district court's decisions in both the contract and bankruptcy actions, finding no error in the rulings.
• Remex Elecs. Ltd. v. Axl Indus.
  127 B.R. 482· S.D. Fla.· 1991-05-20
  The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's dismissal of the involuntary petition, finding that the debt was subject to a bona fide dispute and that non-bankruptcy remedies were adequate.
• Wider v. Wootton
  907 F.2d 570· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-07
  A debtor operating a Ponzi scheme, even if engaging in securities transactions, does not qualify as a 'stockbroker' under the Bankruptcy Code because they lack 'customers' as statutorily defined, thus the 'stockbroker defense' to avoidance of preferential transfers is unavailable
• William D. Seidle for the Est. of Airlift Int'l, Inc. v. Gatx Leasing Corp.
  778 F.2d 659· 11th Cir.· 1985-12-16
  A stipulation entered into under 11 U.S.C. § 1110, which allows a debtor to retain possession of aircraft by curing defaults, precludes a bankruptcy trustee from recovering pre-petition payments made pursuant to that stipulation as preferential transfers under 11 U.S.C. § 547.