Antecedent Debt

177 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• In re Bohlen Enters., Ltd. v. The Nat'l Bank OF Waterloo
  859 F.2d 561· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-30 ·cited 10×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the earmarked funds doctrine applies, preventing the transfer from being a voidable preference because the funds were not the debtor's property and did not diminish the debtor's estate.
• Deel Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Levine
  721 F.2d 750· 11th Cir.· 1983-12-19 ·cited 10×
  A debtor can avoid a preferential transfer under section 522(h) even if the property would not be exempt from the creditor's claim under state law, and the 'diminution of estate' doctrine does not apply to such debtor actions.
• Clay v. Traders Bank OF Kan. City
  708 F.2d 1347· 8th Cir.· 1983-06-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the debtors were insolvent when the deed of trust was executed, making it a voidable preference, but remanded for determination of whether a $125,000.00 debt was an antecedent corporate debt.
• Kapela v. Newman
  649 F.2d 887· 1st Cir.· 1981-05-22 ·cited 10×
  A guarantor does not receive a voidable preference when a debtor corporation uses a corporate asset, in which the creditor bank held a perfected security interest, to reduce the creditor's loan, even if the asset is a debt owed by the guarantor to the corporation.
• In re Meredosia Harbor & Fleeting Serv., Inc. v. Magill-Appellee
  545 F.2d 583· 7th Cir.· 1976-11-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to determine the validity of the maritime mortgage and that the mortgage was voidable as a preference because it was given for an antecedent debt while the mortgagor was insolvent and the mortgagees had reasonable cause to
• In re Hygrade Envelope Corp. v. Gibraltar Factors Corp.
  393 F.2d 60· 2d Cir.· 1968-04-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trustee is entitled to recover the value of a preferentially transferred insurance policy, reduced by amounts attributable to new advances made in good faith, but not by advances secured by other collateral.
• Charles C. Shaw in Bankr. of Bemporad Carpet Mills, Inc. v. Walter E. Heller & Co.
  385 F.2d 353· 5th Cir.· 1967-09-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that payments made by Heller to suppliers using Bemporad's accounts receivable constituted a voidable preference under Section 60 of the Bankruptcy Act, precluding Heller from claiming a setoff.
• Delia v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  362 F.2d 400· 6th Cir.· 1966-06-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner was liable as a transferee for the corporation's unpaid income taxes, affirming the Tax Court's decision.
• H. W. Glessner in Bankruptcy of Marvin K. Dunagan v. Massey-Ferguson, Inc.
  353 F.2d 986· 9th Cir.· 1965-12-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the repossession of property by a conditional seller within four months of the buyer's bankruptcy, where the conditional sales contract was unfiled, constitutes a preferential transfer under § 60(b) of the Bankruptcy Act, as amended.
• Robert W. Matthews in Bankr. of Beard & Co., Inc. v. James Talcott, Inc.
  345 F.2d 374· 7th Cir.· 1965-04-30 ·cited 10×
  The court held that designations of lumber inventory made within four months prior to bankruptcy did not constitute voidable preferences because they related back to the date the factor's lien notice was filed, and that other challenged transactions were validly secured.
• Am. Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. of Chicago v. Bone
  333 F.2d 984· 8th Cir.· 1964-07-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trustee failed to establish that the trust deed constituted a voidable preference because there was insufficient evidence of the bankrupt's insolvency at the time of the transfer and the bank's reasonable cause to believe in such insolvency.
• Saper v. Hewitt S. West, Jr.
  263 F.2d 422· 2d Cir.· 1959-02-04 ·cited 10×
  The trustee in bankruptcy cannot recover funds distributed by a state court judgment, as the transfer occurred when the funds were deposited with the court clerk, and the bankrupt was not insolvent at that time.
• Republic Nat'l Bank OF Dallas v. Robert G. Vial for The Ronston Corp.
  232 F.2d 785· 5th Cir.· 1956-04-19 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the bank's lien on accounts receivable collections was not valid because the accounts were not in existence when the notice of assignment was filed, and the Bankruptcy Act denies equitable liens where legal liens are not perfected. The court also modified the
• Bostian v. Levich
  134 F.2d 284· 8th Cir.· 1943-03-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial judge's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous, and therefore the judgment must be affirmed.
• Paragon Health Servs., Inc. v. Cent. Palm Beach Cmty. Mental Health Ctr., Inc.
  859 So. 2d 1233· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-11-12 ·cited 9×
  Paragon Health Services, as assignee of a judgment creditor, appealed a summary judgment dismissing its fraudulent transfer claims against corporate officers and their wives under Florida's Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act. The court affirmed dismissal of claims based on anteceden
• Murray Drabkin v. A.I. Credit Corp.
  800 F.2d 1153· D.C. Cir.· 1986-08-29 ·cited 9×
  Payments made by a debtor to an undersecured creditor in the ninety days before bankruptcy are voidable preferences if they reduce the unsecured portion of the debt, and forbearance alone does not constitute 'new value' under the Bankruptcy Code.
• First Federal OF Michigan v. Barrow
  878 F.2d 912· 6th Cir.· 1989-06-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that summary judgment was inappropriate because disputed issues of material fact existed regarding whether payments were made in the ordinary course of business and whether tax payments were current or past due.
• In re Brass Kettle Rest., Inc. v. ASH
  790 F.2d 574· 7th Cir.· 1986-05-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the retainer agreement created a valid equitable lien, meaning the payments received by the law firm were not preferential transfers.
• 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.
• In re Frigitemp Corp. v. Alpha Assocs., Inc.
  753 F.2d 230· 2d Cir.· 1985-01-16 ·cited 8×
  The 'running account' defense to preference liability, judicially created under prior bankruptcy law, did not survive the 1903 amendments to the Bankruptcy Act and is no longer a valid defense.
• Louis Geremia in Bankr. of Avtek Mfg. Corp. v. The First Nat'l Bank OF Boston
  653 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1981-06-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the transfer of AMC's inventory proceeds to Avtek Inc. and then to the bank was not a fraudulent conveyance under the Bankruptcy Act, as it was supported by fair consideration in satisfaction of antecedent debts.
• Creditors of James P. DeANGIO v. DeANGIO
  554 F.2d 863· 8th Cir.· 1977-05-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a payment made by a third party to a creditor does not constitute a voidable preference if the debtor's estate was not depleted by the transfer.
• In re Nunnemaker Transp. Co., Inc. v. United Cal. Bank
  456 F.2d 28· 9th Cir.· 1972-02-11 ·cited 8×
  The dissenting judge would hold that the Bank's security interest was unperfected because the collateral was an 'account' requiring filing, and that a conflict exists between federal bankruptcy law and state law regarding antecedent debt.
• The K. King & The G. Shuler Corp. v. Petitioning Creditors
  427 F.2d 689· 9th Cir.· 1970-06-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a transfer of property substantially in excess of the value of the creditor's security interest constitutes a preference and an act of bankruptcy.
• Harold C. Abramson for Casco Chem. Corp. v. Waller C. Boedeker
  379 F.2d 741· 5th Cir.· 1967-06-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the date of bankruptcy is the date of the original petition, and that the Bank's assignment of accounts receivable was voidable due to failure to comply with Texas recording statutes.
• Tyrrell v. Dobbs Inv. Co. (formerly known as Dobbs GM Diesel
  337 F.2d 761· 10th Cir.· 1964-10-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Trustee presented sufficient evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the security instrument was perfected within the 21-day period required by the Bankruptcy Act, thus reversing the trial court's determination.
• Ricotta v. Burns Coal & Bldg. Supply Co.
  264 F.2d 749· 2d Cir.· 1959-03-16 ·cited 8×
  Payments received by a creditor from a bankrupt are not preferential if, at the time of payment, the creditor could have secured the debt by filing a valid lien that would not have improved their position relative to other creditors.
• Greenblatt v. Ernest R. Utley in bankruptcy for Moses A. Fleming
  240 F.2d 243· 9th Cir.· 1956-10-09 ·cited 8×
  The appellate court held that it lacked jurisdiction to make affirmative findings of fact regarding the existence of a mechanic's lien or the agreement for forbearance.
• In re LE Maire Cosm. Co. v. Kennedy
  174 F.2d 749· 7th Cir.· 1949-05-16 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the chattel mortgage and payments made by an individual were not voidable preferences of the debtor corporation because the corporation did not own the property or make the payments, and the transfer was void under the Bulk Sales Act.
• In re Quaker City Sheet Metal Co. Appeal of Klauder
  129 F.2d 894· 3d Cir.· 1942-08-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that transfers made for contemporaneous value, even if unperfected, are not preferential under Section 60(a) of the Bankruptcy Act.
• Gen. Kontrolar Co., Inc. v. Allen
  124 F.2d 123· 6th Cir.· 1941-11-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the assignment of patents was valid because the assignee had no knowledge of the debtor corporation's intent to hinder creditors and provided fair consideration.
• In re Fuel OIL Supply & Terminaling, Inc. v. Fuel OIL Supply & Terminaling, Inc.
  837 F.2d 224· 5th Cir.· 1988-02-12 ·cited 7×
  The court held that transfers made by a debtor to a creditor, in exchange for the release of collateral securing letters of credit issued by a third-party bank, satisfy the "new value" requirement of 11 U.S.C. § 547(c)(1), even if the new value comes from the bank and not directl
• Mansolillo v. Parties BY Lynn, Inc.
  753 So. 2d 637· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-03-01 ·cited 6×
  Angelina Mansolillo, an officer and director of Stanley Roofing Company, appeals a judgment against her for fraudulent conveyance of company assets (eight trucks worth $42,500) to herself when the company was insolvent. The court affirmed, holding that the transfer violated Flori
• In re Spada v. Spada
  903 F.2d 971· 3d Cir.· 1990-05-22 ·cited 6×
  A transfer is only a preference to the extent the value received by the creditor exceeds the new value given to the debtor, and the bankruptcy court must calculate this specific amount.
• In re R & T Roofing Structures & Commercial Framing, Inc. v. Daniel-Appellee
  887 F.2d 981· 9th Cir.· 1989-10-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the government failed to establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether seized funds were held in trust, and thus summary judgment for the trustee was proper.
• In re Robinson Bros. Drilling, Inc. v. U.P.G., Inc.
  877 F.2d 32· 10th Cir.· 1989-06-13 ·cited 6×
  A creditor seeking the protection of the contemporaneous exchange for new value defense under § 547(c)(1) must prove the specific measure of new value given to the debtor, not just the parties' intent.
• In re James Ross Hartley & Sharon Lee Hartley v. Peoples Banking Co.
  825 F.2d 1067· 6th Cir.· 1987-08-07 ·cited 6×
  A payment by a third party to a creditor on behalf of a debtor is a voidable preferential transfer only to the extent the debtor's estate was diminished by the transaction, typically by the value of any security interests granted.
• Leasing Serv. Corp. v. Wendel (In Re Air Conditioning
  72 B.R. 657· S.D. Fla.· 1987-03-10 ·cited 6×
  The Bankruptcy Court erred in nullifying the letter of credit; however, the finding of a preferential transfer to LSC is affirmed, and the trustee may recover from LSC.
• In re Harold C. Abramson. Harold C. Abramson in Bankr. of Galaxy Indus., Inc. v. ST. Regis Paper Co.
  715 F.2d 934· 5th Cir.· 1983-09-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the transfer of Galaxy's option and support equipment to Southland constituted an avoidable preference under § 60 of the Bankruptcy Act, as it resulted in a diminution of the bankrupt estate and Southland had reasonable cause to believe Galaxy was insolvent.
• Whitlock v. Hause
  694 F.2d 861· 1st Cir.· 1982-12-01 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the bankruptcy court properly denied the Hauses' demand for a jury trial and correctly determined that the conveyance was a fraudulent transfer lacking fair consideration.
• In re Vodco Volume Dev. Co., Inc. v. Appleman
  567 F.2d 967· 10th Cir.· 1977-12-29 ·cited 6×
  A late-filed continuation statement under Colorado law does not establish continuous perfection against a bankruptcy trustee for purposes of determining preferential transfers under the Bankruptcy Act.
• Grant M. Prisbrey in Bankruptcy of the Estate of DeWayne Iverson v. Noble
  505 F.2d 170· 10th Cir.· 1974-11-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the transfer of stock was voidable as a fraudulent transfer and a preference, and the trustee succeeded to the rights of a bona fide purchaser for the benefit of the estate.
• In re Jack Kardow Plumbing Co. v. Nass
  451 F.2d 123· 5th Cir.· 1971-10-28 ·cited 6×
  A creditor filing a proof of secured claim may be subject to summary jurisdiction under § 57(g) if the filing indicates an intent to share in the general assets of the bankruptcy estate, but this must be determined by examining the circumstances of the filing.
• United Milk Prods. Co. v. Lawndale Nat'l Bank OF Chicago
  392 F.2d 876· 7th Cir.· 1968-02-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in dismissing all four counts of the complaint, as the alleged negligence of the bank was not the proximate cause of the plaintiff's injury.
• G. L. Nicklaus in Bankr. of the Est. of Bronson Woodworth, Inc. v. Peoples Bank & Tr. Co.
  369 F.2d 683· 8th Cir.· 1966-12-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that payments made by a bankrupt to satisfy an antecedent debt more than four months before bankruptcy, accepted in good faith without notice of fraud, do not constitute fraudulent conveyances under the Bankruptcy Act or Arkansas law.
• Gilmer v. Bankruptcy
  332 F.2d 541· 4th Cir.· 1964-05-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the $260,000 deed of trust was not a fraudulent transfer because the referee's finding of no intent to hinder, delay, or defraud creditors was supported by substantial evidence, and Gilmer acted in good faith. However, the court affirmed the lower court's deci
• Richard E. Bixby in Bankruptcy of Cecil L. Slavens v. First Nat'l Bank OF Elwood
  250 F.2d 713· 7th Cir.· 1957-12-10 ·cited 6×
  The amended petition does not relate back to the original petition's filing date for calculating the four-month period under Section 60(a) of the Bankruptcy Act.
• SAN Mateo Feed & Fuel Co. v. Hayward
  149 F.2d 875· 9th Cir.· 1945-06-14 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the payments made by the bankrupt to the materialmen within four months of bankruptcy constituted a voidable preference because the materialmen had reasonable cause to believe the bankrupt was insolvent and received payment for antecedent debts.
• In re Holloway v. Allison
  955 F.2d 1008· 5th Cir.· 1992-03-23 ·cited 5×
  The court held that an ex-wife who loaned significant funds to her ex-husband while he was insolvent, and who maintained a close personal relationship with him, qualified as an 'insider' under the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, making the transfer of a security interest voidabl
• In re Barefoot v. Champion Credit Corp.
  952 F.2d 795· 4th Cir.· 1991-12-18 ·cited 4×
  Payments made to an unsecured creditor within ninety days of bankruptcy to make good a dishonored check are avoidable preferences, even if the check was delivered before the ninety-day period.