(Defendant-Debtors moved to dismiss complaint of Plaintiff on grounds Plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted based on Fed.R.Bankr.P. 7012 and Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). In the complaint, Plaintiff alleged Debtors' improper sale of collateral rendered resulting claim nondischargeble under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(6) as arising from a "willful and malicious injury." Court denied motion and matter proceeded to trial. Stipulation of dismissal eventually filed).
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 Robert E. Brizendine (Retired)
(Defendant sought summary judgment on complaint of Plaintiff-Debtor regarding dischargeability of certain tax liability under 11 U.S.C. Sections 523(a)(1) and 507(a)(8)(C) & (E). Court entered judgment in favor of Defendant, finding that Debtor failed to create fact issue pertaining to argument that sales and use taxes at issue were actually excise taxes under state law and not nondischargeable trust fund taxes. See O.C.G.A. Section 48-8-30 et seq.)
(Plaintiff sought determination of nondischargeability of certain debt arising from retail charges under 11 U.S.C. Sections 523(a)(2) and with regard to presumption period set forth in 523(a)(2)(C). Court denied Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, directing case to trial on issue of Debtor's intent in making disputed charges.)
(Dispute concerning dischargeability of loan indebtedness under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(2)(A). Complaint also set forth objection to discharge under 11 U.S.C. Sections 727(a)(2), (a)(3), and (a)(4). Court denied Defendant-Debtors' motion for summary judgment stating that Plaintiffs made sufficient case for proceeding to trial on issue of Debtors' intent in entering into loan transaction.)
(Dispute over whether payment of certain debt ordered under divorce decree constituted domestic support obligation under 11 U.S.C Section 523(a)(5) and/or (a)(15). Summary judgment granted in favor of Plaintiff.)
(Court granted judgment on the pleadings in favor of Plaintiff concerning whether obligation in question (expenses Debtor had been ordered to pay in connection with certain litigation among the parties in another forum) constituted a domestic support obligation under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(5) and/or (a)(15).)
(Order denying Trustee's motion for partial summary judgment on complaint seeking relief under 11 U.S.C. Sections 548(a)(1)(A) (alleged fraudulent transfers), 547 (alleged voidable preference), and 542 (turnover of property). Order also refers to defense asserted under 11 U.S.C. Section 548(c).
Motion would require Court to ascertain issues of intent and good faith, which are inappropriate for summary judgment.)
(Order denying Debtor's motion for summary judgment on complaint to determine dischargeability of debt under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(2)(A), (a)(4), and (a)(6). Court cannot enter summary judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 56, applicable through Fed.R.Bankr.P. 7056, when motion for such relief requires review of issues pertaining to intent or state of mind.)
(Fox v. Lakeview Publishing.com, Inc.),(Court granted Debtor's motion to avoid judicial lien concluding that even though Respondent filed its lien on general execution docket, it failed to perfect same as a lien on a motor vehicle under Georgia law in accordance with O.C.G.A. Section 40-3-53. Since lien did not attach to vehicle in question, it did not secure an interest of Respondent in said property and thus, could be avoided under 11 U.S.C. Section 522(f)(1)).
(Order granting Debtor's motion to determine secured status of claim of second mortgagee and avoiding lien effective upon discharge. Order cites 11 U.S.C. Section 506(a) and (d))