(finding that debtors' case should be dismissed as an abuse under section 707(b)(3)).
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.
(dischargeability of debt pursuant to section 523(a)(4)).
(dischargeability of debt pursuant to section 523(a)(6), (a)(4), and (a)(2)).
Judge James E. Massey (Retired)
Defendants moved to dismiss the complaint seeking revocation of their discharges on the grounds that Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction because Plaintiff failed to alledge the proceeding was core and that Plaintiff lacked standing. Motion denied. Complaint alleged sufficient facts to show jurisdiction. Standing argument was based on assertion that Plaintiff is not a creditor of debtors, but Plaintiff alleges she is, and motion to dismiss cannot be granted unless a defendant can show the plaintiff can prove no set of facts entitling her to relief.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
Defendant moved to dismiss adversary proceeding objecting to his discharge on the ground it was “unfounded” and failed to state a claim for relief. Motion denied. “A complaint may not be dismissed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) ‘unless it appears
beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.’” Defendant could not show from the complaint alone that Plaintiff could not prove facts to support the claim.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
Defendant’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim was denied, even though the complaint had only minimal factual allegations. All that is required is that the complaint contain a "statement calculated to give the defendant fair notice of what the plaintiff's claim is and the grounds upon which it rests."
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
Unopposed motion to vacate dismissal order was denied where debtor’s counsel waited over four months to present a proposed order granting the motion in disregard of BLR 9013-2(a).
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
Movant submitted proposed order that included an award of attorney’s fees and costs, but the motion did not allege that Movant incurred such expenses and did not allege the amount of any fees. Further the contract attached to the motion contained no provision for attorney’s fees on the facts alleged. That portion of the motion was highly improper and the motion was DENIED in part with respect to fees and expenses.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
Honorable Mary Grace Diehl (Recall)
Order Denying Dr. Suraiya Mateen’s Motion for Reconsideration of Order Denying Dr. Suraiya Mateen’s Motion to Compel Trustee to Deposit Funds into the Court’s Registry. Notice of appeal filed February 25, 2008.
Judge Robert E. Brizendine (Retired)
(11 USC Section 523(a)(1), dischargeability of income tax liability).