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.

Available Decisions:

  • Chief Judge Catherine J. Furay -- 2013 - present
  • Judge William V. Altenberger -- 2016 - present
  • Judge Rachel M. Blise -- 2021 - present
  • Judge William H. Frawley -- 1973 - 1986
  • Judge G. Michael Halfenger -- 2020 - present
  • Judge Beth E. Hanan -- 2023 - present
  • Judge Brett H. Ludwig -- 2017 - 2020
  • Judge Thomas M. Lynch -- 2018 - present
  • Judge Robert D. Martin -- 1990 - 2016
  • Judge Katherine M. Perhach -- 2020 - present
  • Judge Thomas S. Utschig -- 1986 - 2012

Judge Thomas S. Utschig

In re Voelker, Case No. 92-52524-13 (12/23/1993) (164 B.R. 308) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 12/23/1993

Case Summary:
Bankruptcy court found that federal tax lien does not attach to items claimed exempt by debtor under 26 U.S.C. § 6334(a).  Exemption statutes are to be liberally construed in favor of debtors.  Enumerated items in § 6334(a) are not only exempt from levy, but from reach of federal tax lien as well.  26 U.S.C. § 6331(b) defines "levy" as "the power of distraint and seizure by any means."  District court reversed the bankruptcy court ruling and remanded for further proceedings. The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision, concluding that the tax lien did indeed attach to exempt property.

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 522(c) -- Exemptions - As Against Federal Tax Liens
28 U.S.C. § 6331(b) -- IRS Levy
28 U.S.C. § 6334(a) -- Exemptions From Federal Tax Liens

Key Terms:
Exemptions
Taxes -- Liens

In re Houligan's of Eau Claire, Inc., Case No. 93-11291-11 (12/06/1993) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 12/06/1993

Case Summary:
Debtor's motion to appoint W.J. Baumann Associates, Ltd. as its accountant during the pendency of its chapter 11 case is granted.  Fact that accounting firm was a prepetition creditor of debtor in the amount of $1,504.44 does not preclude it from employment by debtor on the basis of "disinterested" requirement of 11 U.S.C. § 327(a).  Courts should examine such applications on a case-by-case basis.  Here, the prepetition claim was very small -- comprising 6.25% of the total unsecured debt in the estate, the only objecting party was the U.S. Trustee, the creditors' committee supported the debtor's motion, and statutory purpose behind "disinterested" requirement is not hindered by this result in this case.

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 327(a) -- Employment of Professionals
11 U.S.C. § 1107(b) -- Professionals - "Disinterested" Requirement

Key Terms:
"Disinterested" Requirement – Professionals
Professionals -- Employment Of

Sears, Roebuck & Company v. Bruce A. Johannsen and Terri L. Johannsen (In re Johannsen), Adv. No. 93-1039, Case No. 92-13915-7 (09/29/1993) (160 B.R. 328) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 09/29/1993

Case Summary:
Debtor who purchased $1110.71 worth of Barbie doll items within forty days of her bankruptcy filing successfully rebutted presumption of fraudulent intent under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(C) -- the "luxury goods" exception.  Purchases were Christmas gifts for debtor's daughter; debtor's bankruptcy filing was done on advice of counsel and precipitated by ex-husband's filing; and debtor intended to pay for items in installments.  This was not a case of "loading up" in anticipation of filing bankruptcy -- the type of activity which § 523(a)(2)(C) was intended to prevent.  Citing J.C. Penney Co. v. Leaird (In re Leaird), 106 B.R. 177 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. 1989).

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(C) -- Nondischargeability - Luxury Goods

Key Terms:
Luxury Goods

In re Radandt, Inc., Case No. 90-12157-7 (09/03/1993) (160 B.R. 323) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 09/03/1993

Case Summary:
Wisconsin DNR's motion for allowance of priority administrative expense claim pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 503(b)(1)(a) is denied.  No clean-up costs for environmental damage have yet been incurred -- allowing administrative expense status for undetermined future costs would constitute an advisory opinion; case is not ripe for judicial review.  In addition, clean-up costs would not constitute funds necessary to "preserve" the estate pursuant to § 503(b)(1)(a); trustee had already declared intent to abandon pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 554(a).  Presence of unencumbered assets in the estate does not change this result.

DNR was not entitled to priority lien on environmentally contaminated property to pay for future clean-up costs.  Absent clear statutory authority to do so, court refuses to fashion a remedy to redress environmental damage in light of fact that no evidence established that property presented imminent danger to public.

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 503 -- Administrative Expenses
11 U.S.C. § 554(a) -- Abandonment

Key Terms:
Abandonment
Administrative Expenses
Environmental Clean-Up Costs

Integrity Group Insurance Company v. Scott M. Stelzer (In re Stelzer), Adv. No. 92-1234, Case No. 92-12852-7 (06/10/1993) -- Judge Thomas S. Utschig 06/10/1993

Case Summary:
Plaintiff insurance company's claim that $638.26 it paid for damages done to house of its insured by debtor driving while intoxicated should be nondischargeable is dismissed.  Debtor's actions did not constitute "willful and malicious" injury pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) because he did not intentionally or knowingly damage the insured's house.  Drunk driving is not per se "willful and malicious."  There may be fact situations involving drunk driving so egregious as to constitute "willful and malicious" injury, but this is not such a case.  Agreeing with Cooper v. Noller (In re Noller), 56 B.R. 36 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 1985).

Plaintiff's claim for nondischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) is likewise dismissed.  First-time offense under Wis. Stat. § 346.63 (driving while intoxicated) is technically not a criminal act.  State court judgment cannot therefore be found to be "payable to or for the benefit of a government unit" as required by § 523(a)(7).

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(9) is inapplicable because this case involved damage to property rather than to a person.

Statue/Rule References:
11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(6) -- Nondischargeability - Willful and Malicious Injury
11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(7) -- Nondischargeability - Fines/Penalties/Forfeitures
11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(9) -- Nondischargeability - Drunk Driving

Key Terms:
Drunk Driving
Fines/Penalties/Forfeiture
Willful and Malicious

Judge Robert D. Martin

In re Danner, Case No. 92-32747-7 (11/05/1993) -- Judge Robert D. Martin 11/05/1993

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

Key Terms:
Setoff

In re Brandt, Case No. 92-33559-11 (10/14/1993) -- Judge Robert D. Martin 10/14/1993

Statute/Rule References:
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006 -- Time

Key Terms:
Claims - Bar Date

In re Wimmer, Case No. 90-03462-13 (10/04/1993) -- Judge Robert D. Martin 10/04/1993
Jerry J. Armstrong v. Anchorbank, S.S.B., f/k/a Anchor Savings and Loan Association (In re Trudell), Adv. No. 93-3021, Case No. 91-32942 (08/13/1993) -- Judge Robert D. Martin 08/13/1993

Key Terms:
Preferences

In re Black, Case No. 91-33395-11 (07/12/1993) -- Judge Robert D. Martin 07/12/1993

Statute/Rule References:
26 U.S.C. § 6321 -- Tax liens
26 U.S.C. § 6323 -- Lien priority

Key Terms:
Taxes - Liens

Pages