Debtor sought to avoid state tax liens pursuant to section 522. Motions denied. The lien was not a judicial lien but a statutory lien and was unavoidable under section 522 even though the tax executions provided for a Sheriff’s sale.
You are here
Opinions
Effective January 1, 2017, Orders in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia designated by the Court as "opinions" will be transmitted to the Government Publishing Office (GPO) and made available to the public at no cost. To view these opinions, click HERE to be transferred to GPO site.
Orders designated as Opinions and issued between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2016 are maintained on this website. Many of these Opinions are not intended for publication and are so designated. Each entry includes the style of the matter, the case number, the date entered on the docket, and a short parenthetical expression of the issue(s) raised. The most recent opinions appear first.
You can narrow your search by judge and/or year below. You can also use the search feature above to search by name, word, or phrase. The single opinions are in PDF text format and may be searched for word, phrase, or date by using “Control F,” the Windows search function available in any Windows application.
Judge James E. Massey (Retired)
The Court denied a motion of an individual seeking an order approving an amendment to the Debtor’s schedules that he, and not the corporate Debtor, had prepared and filed.
Debtors objected to the proof of a claim secured by an automobile on the ground that the debt was not “valid” because “upon information and belief the collateral has been in an accident and declared a total loss by the insurance company.” The relief sought was to direct the Trustee to stop funding the claim until it was amended to show an unsecured claim. Debtors’ counsel submitted a proposed order that would have disallowed the claim altogether. For that reason the Court denied the objection, pointed out that an objection to the claim was not the correct procedure, and expressed doubt that Debtors could modify the plan under section 1329.
In Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, the Court determined that certain transfers made by Debtors to Defendants as fraudulent under section 548 and that Defendants were liable to Plaintiffs under section 550(a) in part as initial transferees and in part as persons for whose benefit transfers were made.
Court denied objection to claim of Georgia Department of Revenue served only on the person who filed claim at an address stated therein. The proof of claim limited the address to correspondence and payments. Service should have been made on the head of the Revenue Department and on the Attorney General.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
Court denied objection to proof of claim based on alleged failure of creditor to respond to debtor’s demand that creditor “verify” claim. Debtor scheduled debt to creditor as undisputed in an amount greater than the amount stated in the proof of claim, thereby eliminating any basis for asserting that claim was unenforceable.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
Motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) denied because complaint stated sufficient facts to make it plausible that Plaintiffs could prevail on their objection to Defendant’s discharge.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
Plaintiff trustee was entitled to avoid pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(a)(3) the transfer of real property to a lender because the security deed lacked an unofficial witness and did not provide constructive notice of its existence under Georgia law. Court rejected argument that amendment to O.C.G.A. § 44-14-33 in 1995 changed Georgia law. The attestation of the signatures of the borrowers on a waiver of borrower’s rights attached to the partially attested deed would not provide constructive notice of the waiver to a bona fide purchaser having no actual notice, so as to create a duty of inquiry that would lead to the discovery of the partially attested deed.
Plaintiff trustee was entitled to avoid pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544(a)(3) the transfer of real property to a lender because the security deed was unattested and did not provide constructive notice of its existence under Georgia law. Court rejected argument that amendment to O.C.G.A. § 44-14-33 in 1995 changed Georgia law. The label “Georgia Second Mortgage” at the bottom of the first page of an attested second security deed would not excite attention of a person of ordinary prudence so as to cause such a person to infer or to discover the existence of the unattested first security deed
Alleged failure of counsel for Defendant debtor to notify debtor of the deadline for filing a timely notice of appeal did not constitute excusable neglect under Bankruptcy Rule 8002(c)(2) so as to permit the court to grant an untimely motion to extend the time for filing an appeal.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION