  |
  |
  |
    
  
   |
 | |||
|
|
|
|
| |||
12. Although the payment was made on account of pre-petition crop losses, the debtor's property interest in the payment did not come in existence or accrue until the legislation became law. The payment was not property of the estate because the debtor's estate under § 541(a)(1) cannot be greater than the property rights the debtor had at the commencement of the case. Additionally, the payment was not proceeds of property of the estate under § 541(a)(6) because the debtor had no legal entitlement to a future payment at the time the case was converted.)
In the Matter of Burgess, 438 F.3d 493 (5th Cir. Jan. 27, 2006) (Crop disaster relief payment to debtor, which was the result of a law enacted after the debtor filed bankruptcy, was not part of debtor's estate pursuant to § 541, even though it was payable for crop damages that occurred pre-petition, because property of the estate is determined at the commencement of the case, and the debtor had no legal right to receive the payment until the law was enacted.)
Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of PSA, Inc., v. Edwards, 437 F.3d 1145 (11th Cir. Jan. 30, 2006) (Trustee bringing RICO claim on behalf of debtor's estate was subject to in pari delicto defense based on debtor's wrongdoing pursuant to the plain meaning of § 541(a), which gives a bankruptcy trustee no greater rights or interests than the rights and interests of the debtor.)
French v. Liebmann (In re French), 440 F.3d 145 (4th Cir. Feb. 14, 2006) (A bankruptcy court can avoid a fraudulent transfer of foreign real property between United States residents. Although a presumption exists against extraterritoriality, when Congress adopted § 541, broadly defining property of the estate as all property "wherever located," it expressly exercised its authority to enforce its laws beyond the territorial boundaries of the United States. Additionally, principles of international comity do not require application of foreign law in this case despite the property's location because it is desirable to deal with the entire bankruptcy estate as a whole, the vast majority of interested parties in this case are located in the United States, and most of the activity surrounding the transfer occurred in the United States.)
In re OneCast Media, Inc., 439 F.3d 558 (9th Cir. Feb. 23, 2006) (Bankruptcy Court committed clear error in holding that it had no jurisdiction over bankruptcy trustee's claim for proceeds of letter of credit debtor had given to its landlord as a security deposit. Trustee's interest in the letter of credit proceeds was property of the estate, giving the Bankruptcy Court jurisdiction.)
DeBold v. Case, 452 F.3d 756 (8th Cir. June 26, 2006) (In dispute as to the ownership of property in an involuntary Chapter 7 case, trustee had initial burden of proving that property belonged to the estate.)
Norfolk S. Ry. Co. v. Consolidated Freightways Corp. (In re Consolidated
Freightways Corp.), 443 F.3d 1160 (9th Cir. Apr. 10, 2006) (There is no federal interline trust doctrine that a creditor can use to recover in bankruptcy funds paid to the debtor pre-petition. "Interlining" occurs when multiple freight carriers
