2007 Judge Winfield - Opinions
Judge Novalyn L. Winfield -- Opinions signed in 2007
Before the court was the Chapter 7 Trustee’s motion to revoke debtor's discharge based on his alleged fraud and nondisclosure of assets. The issues were (1) whether the Trustee met the criteria for revocation of discharge under § 727(d) of the Code, and (ii) whether revocation was barred by the time limitation in § 727(e) of the Code.
Before the Court was debtor’s motion to reimpose the automatic stay. The motion was grounded on Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(1) and (6).
Before the court was the auditor’s motion for partial summary judgment seeking a determination that the Creditors’ Committee lacked the factual record to sustain causes of action for negligence or negligent misrepresentation.
Before the court was debtor’s motion for summary judgment and defendant’s cross-motion for summary judgment, regarding construction of a stipulation of settlement under New York law and whether the stipulation constituted an executory contract that could be rejected.
Before the court was a motion for summary judgment and cross-motion for summary judgment to determine whether payments made by acquirer of Debtors’ business to Debtors’ former trade vendors constituted avoidable preferences, and whether trade vendors were
permitted to assert defenses set forth in § 547(c)(2) and (c)(4) of the Code.
Before the court was debtor’s motion for reconsideration pursuant to Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 9023 and 9024 requesting the court to reconsider its dismissal of debtor’s adversary complaint.
Before the court was Debtor’s motion to reopen under 11 U.S.C. §§ 350(b) the bankruptcy case in order to file reaffirmation agreements pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 524(c) which were “forwarded after discharge.”
Before the court was debtor’s motion to convert from a chapter 7 to a chapter 13 case. The issues presented were (i) whether § 706 of the Code prevented the debtors from converting to Chapter 13 because they were not eligible pursuant to § 109(e) of the Code and (ii) even if the debtors were eligible Chapter 13 debtors pursuant to § 109(e), whether the court should deny the motion based upon a finding of bad faith.