The summaries on this website are summaries of the opinions issued by the judges of the Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Virginia from October 2004 to date. The opinions may be searched by year, judge, category and chapter. For a more detailed search, enter a keyword in the search box above. This opinion bank, however, is not an exhaustive list of opinions issued by the judges of the Western District. These summaries are not intended to replace other research methods, but may be used as a starting point for your research. These summaries do not contain information as to whether an opinion has been published, appealed or the disposition of any such appeal, or otherwise overruled or affected by subsequent case law or statute. These summaries have been prepared for the convenience of the researcher and in no way constitute an interpretation by the Court of the opinion summarized. Please rely on the opinion not the summary. Please contact Judge Connelly's chambers or Judge Black's chambers regarding any questions or errors.
Counsel for debtor's application for compensation allowed in part. Burden of proof on counsel to prove services were actually rendered, reasonable and necessary. Typing services of paralegal, when counsel's time dictating the documents in question have been separately charged, are part of overhead. Charges for travel and applications for compensation approved at 75% of the standard hourly rate.
The Court concluded that Section 549 does not apply to transfers authorized by the Court and that "ends of justice" do not require granting the Trustee's second motion for leave to amend complaint to add such a count.
The court granted the Chapter 13 Trustee's motion to dismiss because the Debtor failed to comply with an order to which he consented, requiring that he be current on all plan payments.
The court held that the Debtors' case should not be dismissed under 11 U.S.C. § 707(b) for substantial abuse because a Chapter 13 plan would provide a relatively modest distribution to general unsecured creditors, a third of the Debtors' general unsecured debt was due to medical bills, and the Debtors had no substantial credit card obligations.
Objection to debtor's motion to add a creditor to his bankruptcy schedules sustained as the creditor's claim was a post-petition obligation not affected by the discharge order.
The Court declined to dismiss the Chapter 7 case under section 707(b) for substantial abuse, despite the fact that the Debtor had disposable income, after analyzing the factors outlined in Green v. Staples (In re Green), 934 F.2d 568 (4th Cir. 1991).
The Court approved the Chapter 7 Trustee's fee application after conducting the lodestar analysis.
The Court determined that when a petition is filed after the dismissal of a prior case that was pending within one year, the language in Section 362(c)(3)(A) terminates the stay only with respect to pre-petition action taken against the Debtor. Where no such pre-petition actions were taken, it was not necessary to continue the stay under 362(c)(3)(B).
The court remanded a state court action that was initiated after the Chapter 7 case was closed and the Debtor received a discharge, because the Debtor failed to comply with Rule 9027(a)(3) (requiring the filing of Notice of Removal no later than 30 days after a claim or cause of action is asserted in another court).
The Court denied a motion for summary judgment in favor of creditors that purchased real property of the estate, where the creditors argued that purchasing the real property extinguished liability to the estate for unpaid rent.