2007 Judge Lyons - Opinions
Judge Raymond T. Lyons -- Opinions signed in 2007
Debtor’s 10 day window to exercise right to redeem property after sheriff’s sale (Rule 4:65-5) had expired, so relief from stay was granted to purchaser of that property. Sale was post-petition after mortgagee had obtained relief from stay, and In re Connors (497 F.3d 314) deemed non-applicable. 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(8) governs.
No citation available.
Plaintiff objected to discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(4), alleging that the debtor knowingly and fraudulently made a false oath relating to a material fact. However, payments to ex-wife’s firm were outside the 1 year reporting requirement. Additionally, other arrangements that favored the ex-wife and children over other creditors were legitimate in nature. Plaintiff failed to meet burden of proof concerning a false oath. Objection to discharge denied, discharge granted.
2007 Bankr. LEXIS 2042 (Bankr. D.N.J. June 13, 2007)
2007 WL 1729663 (Bankr. D.N.J. June 13, 2007)
Dischargeability under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(B). Plaintiff proved all 5 elements of the subsection: (1) the debtor made a written statement, (2) concerning his financial condition, (3) that was materially false, (4) intending to deceive the creditor; and (5) the creditor actually and reasonably relied on the misrepresentation. Debtor’s debt was not dischargeable.
2007 Bankr. LEXIS 1763 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2007)
2007 WL 1480716 (Bankr. D.N.J. May 18, 2007)
Debtor submitted false Statement of Financial Affairs, required by 11 U.S.C. §521 and Rule 1007(b)(1). Failure to maintain and preserve adequate records was grounds to deny debtor a discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 727(a)(3). Debtor also denied discharge under § 727(a)(4)(A) where “the debtor knowingly and fraudulently, in or in connection with the case, made a false oath or account.” Debtor additionally violated §727(a)(2) by concealing assets with intent to hinder a creditor. Discharge denied.
2007 Bankr. LEXIS 323 (Bankr. D.N.J. Jan. 24, 2007)
2007 WL 295351 (Bankr. D.N.J. Jan. 24, 2007)
Debtor objected to proof of claim based upon a default judgment in the Isle of Man, arguing that the judgment violated his due process rights and should not be afforded comity. The Court cited Saroop (109 F.3d 165) in affording a strong presumption in favor of recognizing the decisions of foreign proceedings. Debtor failed in his burden to show cause for denying the judgment. Objection denied.
No citation available.
Debtor failed in his burden to overcome the prima facie validity of a claim, 11 U.S.C. § 501. Objection to proof of claim denied. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3001(f).
2007 Bankr. LEXIS 1917 (Bankr. D.N.J. May 30, 2007)
2007 WL 1591880 (Bankr. D.N.J. May 30, 2007)
Whether releases and injunctions from ephedra-related lawsuits contained in Nutraquest’s Chapter 11 Plan and a class action judgment bar certain claims. Plaintiff was not a party to modifications that expanded class from ephedra-related to all injuries, so is not bound by plan. The class action related to consumer fraud and false advertising, while explicitly excluding personal injury claims, thus it did not preclude Plaintiff’s personal injury claim. Alleged tort occurred after Nutraquest had filed for bankruptcy, so was an administrative claim exempt from discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 1141 (d)(1). Similar constructive trust claim by Committee was previously dismissed with prejudice by Court, barring Plaintiff’s claim.
2007 WL 3311725 (Bankr. D.N.J. Nov. 5, 2007)