The Court granted the Chapter 13 Trustee's motion for summary judgment and denied the Defendant credit union's cross-motion, holding that the Trustee was entitled to avoid a transfer of $3,400 from the Debtor to the Defendant as a preferential transfer pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 547 and that the ordinary course of business exception contained in 11 U.S.C. Section 547(c) did not apply because the transfers were in payment of a debt on which the Defendant obtained a nondischargeability judgment in a prior bankruptcy case; the Court concluded that the Debtor did not incur the debt in the ordinary course of her financial affairs because--accordingly to the nondischargeability judgment in the prior case--she did so fraudulently, that the transfers were not made in the ordinary course of her financial affairs, and that the transfers were not made according to ordinary business terms.
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.
Honorable James R. Sacca
Order on Complaint filed by the Debtor to enforce the National Mortgage Settlement among the states Attorneys General, the U.S. Government and certain lenders and to set aside a pre-petition foreclosure. There is no private right of enforcement under the National Mortgage Settlement. Abstention pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(c)(1) was warranted for the remaining state-law issues because the subject property was never part of the estate and the Trustee abandoned the cause of action to the Debtor. The Debtor has received his discharge and the underlying bankruptcy case is closed. Consequently, the final disposition of the adversary proceeding would have no effect on the administration of the underlying bankruptcy case.
Order after trial on Trustee’s complaint seeking to avoid transfers pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 544 and the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act (“UFTA”) as enacted at O.C.G.A. § 18-2-70 et. seq. The Trustee also asked the Court to determine whether principals of the Debtor were “alter egos” of the Debtor and therefore liable for all claims against the Debtor. The Court held the Defendants liable in varying amounts. The opinion analyzes liability under the UFTA, including insolvency and insiders. The opinion also traces funds to the immediate and mediate transferees to determine liability under 11 U.S.C. § 550. Lastly, the Order examines Georgia law on alter ego liability.
Motion to Reopen to seek an order of contempt for violation of the discharge injunction; effect of Ch 7 discharge on liens
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
(Court denied in part and granted in part Debtors' Motion to Reconsider the Court's partial denial of Debtors' Motion to Avoid Lien, finding that the Debtors claimed an improper exemption by claiming an exemption pursuant to Georgia state law as it applied on the date of the conversion of the case rather than the applicable exemption allowed pursuant to state law as of the petition date.)
Leave to file an amended complaint
Pleading Standards in a Motion for Default Judgment; dischargeability of credit card debt
Honorable Mary Grace Diehl (Recall)
The Court denied Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment. Plaintiff filed a complaint to determine nondischargeability of debt under sections 523(a)(2), (4), and (6) and 523(c). Summary judgment was not appropriate because fact issues remained concerning Defendant’s intent in procuring and executing the promissory note at issue.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION
Judge Robert E. Brizendine (Retired)
Following trial in Chapter 7 case, Court held that Plaintiffs failed to prove grounds for denial of discharge under 11 U.S.C. Section 727(a)(4)(A) (knowingly making false oath) or 727(a)(5) (failing to explain satisfactorily losses or deficiencies of certain alleged assets). Court further held Plaintiffs did not establish basis for holding that state court judgment awarding damages for breach of reimbursement agreement, made following allegations of Plaintiff former business associates that Debtors misdirected monies of joint business entity, should be excepted from discharge under 11 U.S.C. Section 523(a)(2)(A) in terms of required showing of Debtors' fraudulent intent with respect to same. Court held as well that Plaintiffs did not make case under Section 523(a)(4), since relationship of parties in LLC did not offer basis for finding necessary fiduciary relationship as required under federal standard.
Honorable Barbara Ellis-Monro, Chief Judge
Order approving section 363 sale and overruling objections. The Court found that Debtor's property could be sold free and clear of purported easement interests, as one objector had no legal interest in the property, and the second had an express easement limited by its terms to the period when the property was used as an airport. The third objection to sale by a homeowner's association was overruled because it requested the Court review a final state court order, of which the association had notice and was bound, and because its request for a determination of rights did not present a concrete injury reviewable by the Court.
NOT INTENDED FOR PUBLICATION