(Fed.R.Bankr.P. 8005, stay pending appeal)
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)
(11 U.S.C. Sections 523(a)(5) & (a)(15), dischargeability, summary judgment, collateral estoppel)
(order authorizing alternative dispute resolution,
specifically, an evaluative and directive settlement conference with another bankruptcy judge)
(Reopening to change amount of claim is
unnecessary and does not affect whether the claim is discharged)
(Even when the client terminates an attorney's
employment, the attorney must file a motion to withdraw)
(granting plaintiff's complaint, finding that a debt arising under a divorce decree is nondischargeable under section 523(a)(15))
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
(Non-creditor lacks standing to object to discharge)
Honorable Paul W. Bonapfel
(Despite failure to fill in box #4 on the proof of claim form, claimant attached sufficient documentation for court to determine amount of claim. Trustee properly objected to claim because, as filed, it was not capable of being administered)
(Order denying Debtor's motion to reopen case because there is no legal basis for relief requested. Having voluntarily reaffirmed a debt on a vehicle, Debtor cannot now add the deficiency claim based upon the surrender of the vehicle after the time for rescinding the reaffirmation agreement has expired.)
Judge James E. Massey (Retired)
Creditors of Debtor brought claims against Wilmann in state court contending it was a de facto general partner of Debtor. Wilmann sued creditors, seeking benefit of automatic stay so as to enjoin the state court cases. Motion for preliminary injunction denied because Wilmann could not show any of the 4 prerequisites, and in particular any likelihood of success on merits.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION