You are here

Opinions

The Western District of Wisconsin offers a database of opinions for the years 1986 to present, listed by year and judge. For a more detailed search, enter a keyword, statute, rule or case number in the search box above.

Opinions are also available on the Government Printing Office website for Appellate, District and Bankruptcy cases. The content of this collection dates back to April 2004, though searchable electronic holdings for some courts may be incomplete for this earlier time period.

For a direct link to the Western Wisconsin Bankruptcy Court on-line opinions, visit this link.

Judge Thomas S. Utschig

In re Bringe, Case No. 90-02186-12 (05/15/1992) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 05/15/1992

Case Summary:
IRS was provided with adequate notice of debtors' bankruptcy even though the notice contained a one-digit error in Mr. Bringe's social security number and did not contain his employee identification number.  The notice contained the correct names and address of the debtors as well as Mrs. Bringe's correct social security number.  Citing Fed. R. Bankr. P. 1005 & 2002.

IRS claim was filed almost one year after the deadline and the debtors have already made payments pursuant to their chapter 12 plan.  Allowing the late-filed claim would harm the debtors and the unsecured creditors holding allowed claims.  Trustee's objection to IRS's claim is therefore granted and the claim is disallowed.  Citing Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006.

Statute/Rule References:
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2002 -- Notice of Bankruptcy
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3002(c) -- Time for Filing Proof of Claim
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3003(c) -- Filing Proof of Claim
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006 -- Time

Key Words:
Claims -- Late Filed
Notice -- Adequacy/Lack Of

In re Rynearson, Case No. 91-21850-7 (04/06/1992) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 04/06/1992

Case Summary:
Debtor's motion for valuation of the lien of the USA-FmHA at $21,000 is denied.  Supreme Court's decision in Dewsnup v. Timm, 116 L. Ed. 2d 903 (1992), prevents chapter 7 debtors from "stripping down" the lien of a creditor to the judicially determined value of the collateral.  Debtors' attempts to distinguish Dewsnup on its facts are without merit.

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 506(d) -- "Strip Down"

Key Terms:
“Strip Down”

In re Wundrow, Case No. 91-12895-7, 91-12896-7, 91-12899-7 (01/24/1992) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 01/24/1992

Case Summary:
Complete liquidation of partnership assets is not required in order for winding up and termination of the partnership to occur.  Debtors, members of a terminated family farm partnership, each qualify as a "debtor" for purposes of Wisconsin's exemption statute.

Exemption rights are determined based on circumstances present at the time of filing of the bankruptcy petition.  Fact that debtors were engaged in farming at time of filing and have expressed a desire to continue doing so is sufficient to entitle them to an exemption in farm machinery.

Statue/Rule References:
Wis. Stat. § 815.18 – Exemptions

Key Terms:
Exemptions
Partnerships

In re Dearth, Case No. 89-01302-7 (01/21/1992) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 01/21/1992

Case Summary:
Security interest of objecting creditors did not have purchase money status so as to warrant denial of debtors' motion to avoid the creditors' lien in a Ford tractor.  Mere fact that creditors were co-makers on a note, part of the proceeds of which were used to pay off the balance on their son's tractor, did not give them an interest in that tractor.  Creditors therefore did not "give value" for purposes of Wis. Stat. § 409.107, the Wisconsin purchase money security interest provision.

Statue/Rule References:
Wis. Stat. § 409.107 -- Purchase Money Security Interest

Key Terms:
Security Interests - "Giving Value"
Security Interests - Purchase Money

In re Shaker, Case No. 90-00884-7 (01/15/1992) (137 B.R. 930) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 01/15/1992

Case Summary:
The "applicable nonbankruptcy law" language of § 541(c)(2) includes ERISA's anti-alienation provisions.  Debtors' pension plan account is therefore excluded from the bankruptcy estate. Alternatively, § 815.18(31) of the Wisconsin statutes "relates to" ERISA plans for purposes of 29 U.S.C. § 1144(a) but is saved from preemption pursuant to § 414(d) of ERISA [29 U.S.C. § 1144(d)].  Preempting Wis. Stat. § 815.18(31) would modify or impair § 522(b) of the bankruptcy code in contravention of 29 U.S.C. § 1144(d).  Debtors' pension plan account is therefore exempted from the bankruptcy estate pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 815.18(31). Alternatively, ERISA's anti-alienation provision constitutes "other federal law" pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 522(b)(2)(a).  The debtors' pension plan account is therefore exempted from the claim of the bankruptcy trustee pursuant to § 522(b)(2)(a).

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 522(b) -- Exemptions - State Law
11 U.S.C. § 541 -- Property of the Estate
Wis. Stat. § 815.18 -- Exemptions

Key Terms:
ERISA
Exemptions

In re Wink, Case No. 91-00120-7 (01/15/1992) (137 B.R. 297) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 01/15/1992

Case Summary:
State of Wisconsin may not effectively "opt out"  of the federal lien avoidance provision by defining its exemptions in such a way so as to exclude encumbered property.

Proper inquiry under 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) is to inquire whether the debtor would be entitled to a particular exemption under state law but for the existence of a lien.  Wisconsin exemption laws can be reconciled with the lien-avoidance provisions of the bankruptcy code; federal law takes precedence over state law in cases involving those lien-avoidance provisions.

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 522(f) -- Lien Avoidance

Key Terms:
Lien Avoidance

In re Steven’s Point Associated, Inc., Case No. 91-52925-7 (12/24/1991) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 12/24/1991

Case Summary:
Absent a reasonably clear manifestation to create a trust, no trust relationship existed between the movant Manheim Auto Auctions and the debtor, a Wisconsin car dealership.

Absent a reasonably clear manifestation by both parties of an intent to enter into a security agreement, no security interest was given in cars transferred to debtor car dealership for sale to third parties.  Mere retention of possession of a vehicle's certificate of title does not automatically result in a security interest attaching to the vehicle.

Movant Auto Auctions failed to show that either of two potentially applicable means of perfecting their alleged security interest in vehicles transferred to debtor had been implemented by them.  Perfected security interest of floor-plan-financing bank therefore took priority over any interest Auto Auctions might have retained in the vehicles.

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 506(c) -- Recovery of Costs/Expenses in Disposing or Preserving Property
Wis. Stat. § 409.103 -- Perfection of Security Interests - Mobile Goods
Wis. Stat. § 409.302 -- Security Interests - Perfection

Key Terms:
Security Interests - Creation
Security Interests - Perfection
Trusts - Generally

In re Pleckham, Case No. 91-52170-11 (12/20/1991) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 12/20/1991

Case Summary:
A combine is not a "mobile good" for purposes of Wis. Stat. § 409.103(3). Creditor who did not file a financing statement in Wisconsin within four months of debtors' relocation of collateral to that state lost its priority as to its security interest in that collateral.

Statue/Rule References:
Wis. Stat. § 409.103 -- Perfection of Security Interests - Mobile Goods
Wis. Stat. § 409.103(3)

Key Terms:
Financing Statements -- Multiple State Transactions

Simon Brothers and Walter B. Bowe v. Agri-Supply Cooperative (In re Simon Brothers), Adv. No. 91-1142, Case No. 88-00006-11, 90-03231-11 (11/25/1991) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 11/25/1991

Case Summary:
11 U.S.C. § 553 does not create an independent right of setoff; it limits the use of setoff rights already available under state law. Before determining whether setoff was appropriate pursuant to § 553, state law right of setoff must first be established.  That issue is a proper one for determination by a state court. Whether the language in defendant Agri-Supply's bylaws is sufficient to grant it a lien under Wisconsin law is a proper matter for state court determination.

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 553 -- Setoff

Key Terms:
Setoff

Gary L. Stanton v. Robert R. Reddick (In re Stanton), Adv. No.91-1137, Case No. 91-00994-7 (11/13/1991) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 11/13/1991

Case Summary:
Creditor (Snap-On Tools) did not lose its purchase money status in its security interest in tools sold to debtor so as to make its lien in the tools avoidable by the debtor.  Case did not involve a cross-collateralization, after-acquired property clause or a consolidation of security interests.  The only consolidation which occurred involved the outstanding balances from various purchases made by the debtor.  Where security interest does not specify how payments are to be applied, court can apply the payments pursuant to Wisconsin's "first-in, first-out" payment provision -- Wis. Stat. Ann. § 422.418(3) (West 1988).

Statue/Rule References:
Wis. Stat. § 409.107 -- Purchase money security interest
Wis. Stat. § 422.418 -- Allocation of payments - "first in-first out"

Key Terms:
Security Interests - Allocation of Payments
Security Interests - Consolidation
Security Interests - Purchase Money

Pages