Case Summary:
Debtor-Plaintiff filed this adversary proceeding to recover ownership of Plaintiff’s residence (“Property”) from Defendant, Portage County. The parties submitted a binding Joint Statement of Uncontested Facts. According to those binding statements and Defendant’s Initial Brief, Defendant recorded a tax deed to the Property on May 29, 2026, five months after Plaintiff filed for bankruptcy. Wisconsin Statutes allow a person to redeem land subject to a tax deed until the tax deed is recorded. Because Defendant recorded the tax deed after the automatic stay went into effect, Plaintiff’s right to redeem the Property is tolled. Plaintiff’s ownership interest remains unaffected by the now recorded deed. However, Defendant’s Answer suggests Defendant recorded the tax deed before the bankruptcy filing, in May 2025. If true, the transfer occurred within two years of the bankruptcy filing, rendered Plaintiff insolvent, and was for less than the Property’s reasonably equivalent value. The Court considered the value Plaintiff received at the time of the transfer and found that Plaintiff received an unliquidated right to the undetermined amount of the possible sale surplus of an unscheduled sale. The nebulous nature of this unliquidated “right” confirmed that Plaintiff did not receive any actual value at the time of the transfer. The Court granted summary judgment to Plaintiff and set aside and avoided any transfer of ownership in the Property to Defendant.

Statute/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 101(32) – Definition of “Insolvency”
11 U.S.C. § 548 – Fraudulent Transfers
Wis. Stat. § 75.01(1)(b) – Land Sold for Taxes; Redemption
Wis. Stat. § 75.36(2m) – County Acquisition and Sale of Property

Key Terms:
Avoidance
Reasonably Equivalent Value
Tax Deed

Case Summary:
Plaintiff, a trust, sought to except from discharge a debt personally guaranteed by the Debtor Defendant. Defendant moved to dismiss Plaintiff’s section 523(a)(4) nondischargeability complaint based on defalcation and embezzlement. The Court concluded that Plaintiff failed to plausibly allege a fiduciary relationship between the parties, that the debt arose from any defalcation, or that Defendant embezzled property belonging to Plaintiff with fraudulent intent. Accordingly, the complaint failed to state a claim under section 523(a)(4). The Court granted the motion to dismiss.

Statute/Rule References:                                                                                  
11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(4) – Exceptions to Discharge
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7012(b)(6) – Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim
Civ. P. 12(b)(6) – Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim

Key Terms:                                                                              
Defalcation
Embezzlement
Motion to Dismiss 
Nondischargeability

Case Summary:
Plaintiff CivilGEO, Inc., and Defendant Hiscox Insurance Company, Inc., cross-moved for summary judgment. The core issue underlying the motions was whether there was insurance coverage under a policy insuring Plaintiff. Plaintiff is a defendant in a District Court action against Eternix, Ltd. Plaintiff expected Defendant insurance company to defend against the claims asserted in the District Court action. Defendant refused. Plaintiff later filed a complaint in this Court asserting Defendant breached its duty to defend. The Court ruled that at least one allegation was covered within the policy’s coverage. Under Wisconsin insurance law, one claim within policy coverage is sufficient to trigger an insurer’s duty to defend the entire suit. Plaintiff’s motion was granted.

Statute/Rule References:
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 7056 – Summary judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 – Summary judgment

Key Terms:
Insurer’s Duty to Defend
Summary Judgment
Wisconsin Insurance Law