Preference Avoidance

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

• Levit v. Ingersoll Rand Fin. Corp.
  874 F.2d 1186· 7th Cir.· 1989-05-12 ·cited 48×
  Payments to non-insider creditors that benefit insider guarantors are recoverable by the trustee for up to one year before bankruptcy, but payments of tax obligations and certain pension obligations are not subject to this extended recovery period.
• In re Wood & Locker, Inc. v. Interfirst Bank Dallas, N.A.
  868 F.2d 139· 5th Cir.· 1989-03-09 ·cited 23×
  The court held that an order granting summary judgment in a bankruptcy adversary proceeding that does not adjudicate all claims or parties is interlocutory and not appealable under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d) without Rule 54(b) certification.
• In re Craig OIL Co. v. Flatau
  785 F.2d 1563· 11th Cir.· 1986-04-08 ·cited 19×
  Payments made by a debtor using cashier's checks, many of which were late and made after the debtor ceased operations or faced bankruptcy, were not made in the ordinary course of business or according to ordinary business terms, and thus were avoidable preferences.
• In re Bishop v. Brooks
  819 F.2d 214· 9th Cir.· 1987-06-04 ·cited 14×
  A withdrawal from a Ponzi scheme, even if consistent with prior dealings between the parties, is not a transfer made in the ordinary course of the debtor's financial affairs and is therefore an avoidable preference.
• Braniff Airways v. Exxon Co.
  814 F.2d 1030· 5th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that Exxon had a right of setoff under 11 U.S.C. § 553(a) because the debts were mutual and pre-petition, but remanded to determine if the setoff improved Exxon's position in violation of 11 U.S.C. § 553(b).
• Charisma Inv. Co. N v. v. Air Fla. Sys., Inc.
  68 B.R. 596· S.D. Fla.· 1986-12-15 ·cited 8×
  A creditor's mere forbearance from exercising its right to evict a debtor from leased premises, without actual use or benefit derived by the debtor's estate, does not constitute 'new value' under Section 547(c)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code.
• In re Davis v. Ford Motor Credit Co. & Maxwell Ford Tractor, Inc.
  734 F.2d 604· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that 11 U.S.C. § 547(c)(1) does not protect a lien securing an enabling loan from avoidance as a preference when the lien was perfected beyond the ten-day grace period allowed by § 547(c)(3).
• In re JET Fla. Sys., Inc. v. Airport Sys., Inc.
  841 F.2d 1082· 11th Cir.· 1988-04-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the continued availability of leased premises, which the debtor did not use, did not constitute 'new value' under the subsequent advance exception to preference recovery.
• In re Thelton Coutee and Emogene Coutee v. Brunson
  984 F.2d 138· 5th Cir.· 1993-02-05 ·cited 5×
• In re Chattanooga Wholesale Antiques, Inc. v. Rossville Bank
  930 F.2d 458· 6th Cir.· 1991-04-10 ·cited 2×
  The court held that post-confirmation payments made under a confirmed Chapter 11 plan are not recoverable by a Chapter 7 trustee, but pre-petition payments and a specific post-petition, pre-confirmation payment are recoverable as preferential or unauthorized transfers.
• 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.
• In re Pitman v. Mid-State Homes, Inc.
  843 F.2d 235· 6th Cir.· 1988-03-30 ·cited 2×
  A mortgage transfer made on the same day as the transfer of a warranty deed, in exchange for the deed, constitutes a contemporaneous exchange for new value under 11 U.S.C. § 547(c)(1), and is not avoidable as a preference.
• Deel Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Levine
  16 B.R. 873· S.D. Fla.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 2×
  A judgment lien obtained by a creditor within ninety days of a debtor's bankruptcy filing can be avoided as a preference if it enables the creditor to receive more than they would in a Chapter 7 liquidation.
• In re Jenson v. Jenson
  980 F.2d 1254· 9th Cir.· 1992-12-01
  The FDIC's attachment lien was not a voidable preference and was properly allowed as a secured claim because it was perfected more than 90 days before the bankruptcy filing.
• Fla. Steel Corp. v. Stober (In Re Indus. Supply Corp.)
  127 B.R. 62· M.D. Fla.· 1991-05-14
  The court affirmed the bankruptcy court's judgment, finding that the payments were not made in the ordinary course of business due to extraordinary collection efforts and that the award of pre-judgment interest was not an abuse of discretion.
• Venn v. Roberts Supply
  124 B.R. 858· N.D. Fla.· 1991-02-07
  A financing statement filed solely under a trade name, without the individual debtors' names, is insufficient to perfect a security interest under Florida law.
• In re Clark Pipe & Supply Co., Inc. v. Assocs. Commercial Corp.
  870 F.2d 1022· 5th Cir.· 1989-04-25
  The court held that avoiding a preferential transfer and equitably subordinating a lender's claim are complementary, not duplicative, remedies that can be used together to ensure fair distribution of assets in bankruptcy.