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

Soneet R. Kapila, Trustee v. WLN Family Limited Partnership and Carlayne Holloway (In re LeNeve), Adv. No. 04-3014, Case No. 03-36439-7 (03/08/2006) (341 B.R. 53) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 03/08/2006

Case Summary:
Chapter 7 trustee brought action against defendant to recover alleged fraudulent transfer made by debtor. Creditor contended that she had invested some $700,000 in the debtor’s business ventures. The trustee sought to recover $957,000 in transfers. The court found that the trustee did not prove she recovered a $450,000 transfer. As to the remaining balance, the court concluded that she did provide “reasonably equivalent value” in the form of her investments. The fact that the debtor was apparently engaging in a fraudulent scheme did not preclude the defendant from asserting the right to recover her “investments.”

Statute/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 548 -- Fraudulent Conveyance

Key Terms:
Fraudulent Conveyance

In re Vangen, Case No. 05-13793-7 (11/23/2005) (334 B.R. 241) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 11/23/2005

Case Summary:
The debtor placed some $136,000.00 into retirement-related annuities immediately prior to her bankruptcy. The debtor’s former husband and the bankruptcy trustee both objected to her exemption claims. They contended that her bankruptcy planning justified denial of her exemption under Wis. Stat. § 815.18(10), which provides that an exemption may be denied if the asset was procured, concealed, or transferred with the intention of defrauding creditors. The court overruled the objections, finding that the debtor’s conduct was permissible.

Statute/Rule References:
Wis. Stat. § 815.18 -- Exemptions

In re E.S. Professional Services, Inc., Case No. 05-23206-7 (10/20/2005) (335 B.R. 221) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 10/20/2005

Case Summary:
Alleged debtor sought dismissal of involuntary bankruptcy petition on grounds that it had more than 12 creditors. The petitioning creditor contended that the debtor did not have more than 12 creditors. The court found that an involuntary bankruptcy petition was an extreme remedy with serious consequences for a debtor. Here, the debtor sought to handle its affairs outside the bankruptcy forum and the case appeared to be little more than an extension of an ongoing two-party dispute pending elsewhere. There was unlikely to be a meaningful payout to chapter 7 creditors. The involuntary petition was dismissed.

Statute/Rule References:
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 103 -- Involuntary Petition
11 U.S.C. § 303 -- Involuntary Cases

Mark J. Wittman, Trustee v. Ameriquest Mortgage Company (In re Crossen) Adv. No. 04-0238, Case No. 04-14234-7 (05/11/2005) (325 BR 787) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 05/11/2005

Case Summary:
Chapter 7 trustee sought to avoid a mortgage as a preferential transfer. The debtor had refinanced his home and executed a promissory note for $187,000 on March 1, 2004. The defendant did not fund the loan until March 19, and did not record the mortgage until March 26. The trustee contended that this delay took the mortgage outside the safe harbor provision of 547(e)(2). The court found that the transaction qualified for the safe harbor provision, and that even if it did not, the delay did not preclude the transaction from being considered as a contemporaneous exchange for new value under 547(c)(1). Under the facts of the case, the Court found the transaction to be such a contemporaneous exchange. Judgment was entered in favor of the defendant.

Statute/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 547 -- Preferences

Xiong Vang v. UW Stout Student Business Services and Educational Credit Management Corporation (In re Vang), Adv. No. 04-0094, Case No. 04-11165-7 (324 B.R. 76) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 04/15/2005

Case Summary:
Debtor sought discharge of student loans. According to testimony at trial, the debtor was mildly mentally retarded and had difficulty speaking, reading, and writing the English language. In addition, he lived at or about the poverty level and cared for two preschool age sons, both of whom suffered from developmental delays. Accordingly, the Court discharged the debt as an "undue hardship."

Statute/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(8) -- Nondischargeability - Student Loans

In re Vazquez, Case No. 00-16001-BKC-RAM-7 (S.D. Fla.), and In re Carro, Case No. 00-16003-BKC-RAM-7 (S.D. Fla.) (03/03/2005) (325 B.R. 30) – Judge Thomas S. Utschig 03/03/2005

Case Summary:
Trustee sought approval of settlement agreement with debtor. The primary creditor objected to the settlement and offered to “fund” ongoing litigation with the debtors. The trustee has the burden of demonstrating that a settlement proposal is both reasonable and in the best interests of the bankruptcy estate. The court must consider four factors when reviewing a proposed settlement: (1) probability of success in the litigation; (2) the difficulties, if any, to be encountered in collection; (3) the complexity of litigation and the expense, inconvenience, and delay associated with it; (4) the paramount interest of creditors and a proper deference to their reasonable views in the premises. The court found that despite the creditor’s promise to “fund” future litigation, all other circumstances supported approval of the settlement and the creditor’s perspective was unreasonable.

Marika Tolz, Trustee v. Robert M. Prestwood, Colleen M Prestwood a/k/a Colleen Murphy, and Lauren Financial Services Inc. (In re Prestwood), Adv. No. 03-6609, Case No. 02-23764-BKC-PGH-7 (02/09/2005) (322 B.R. 463) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 02/09/2005

Case Summary:
Debtor was entitled to claim Florida homestead exemption over objection of trustee. Trustee contended that the debtor was not a Florida resident and had instead claimed a California property as his residence. Notwithstanding conflicting testimony about the status of the Florida home as a “vacation property,” the court found that the debtor did reside in Florida and had intended to remain in Florida but for marital discord over the issue.

Statute/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 522(d) -- Exemptions - Federal

Lerneda J. Blossfield v. Todd Alan Blossfield and Maria Isabel Blossfield (In re Blossfield), Ave. No. 04-0103, Case No. 04-10802-7 (12/23/2004) (321 B.R. 913) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 12/23/2004

Case Summary:
Debtor acquired homestead property from his mother. At the time of the transfer, the parties contemplated that the mother would have a life estate in the home and that she would be able to live in the home. The debtor subsequently mortgaged the home and in so doing a new deed was recorded which did not contain the “life estate” provision of the old deed. While the debtor indicated he had his mother’s consent to terminate the life estate interest, she denied discussing it with him. The court found that the debtor did not have consent and that the destruction of the life estate interest constituted a “willful and malicious injury” under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6).

Statute/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) -- Nondischargeability - Willful and Malicious Injury

Barry R. Shear, Trustee for PSI Industries v. Carol Seminara, et al. (In re PSI Industries, Inc.) Adv. No. 01-3075, Case No. 99-33737-11 (11/05/2003) (306 B.R. 377) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 11/05/2003

Case Summary:
Liquidating trustee of corporate debtor brought an action against the debtor’s former officers and directors, alleging that they “looted” the company of millions of dollars through a variety of fraudulent schemes. The court found that the evidence established a pattern of activity designed to “hinder, delay, or defraud” creditors, and that the CEO of the company was demonstrably responsible for looting the company’s assets. The trustee failed to present sufficient evidence regarding the other officers and directors.

In re Jeanne Eliane Farmer, Case 02-16039-7 (06/18/2003) (295 B.R. 322) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 06/18/2003

Case Summary:
Debtor was entitled to an exemption for retirement funds received pursuant to Qualified Domestic Relations Order executed in accordance with the debtor’s divorce decree. The funds were held in an “ERISA-qualified” pension plan and therefore excluded from the debtor’s bankruptcy estate; even if it were part of the bankruptcy estate, it fell within the Wisconsin exemption for retirement assets.

Statute/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 541 -- Property of the Estate 

Key Terms:
Property of the Estate

Pages