  |
  |
  |
    
  
   |
 | |||
|
|
|
|
| |||
whether such contributions constitute a reasonably necessary expense.)
In re Cortez, 457 F.3d 448 (5th Cir. July 20, 2006) (Bankruptcy court should consider post-petition events in evaluating a motion to dismiss under § 707(b) for substantial abuse. Debtor was unemployed when he filed but was hired to a new job four days later. The income derived from the new job would likely give the debtor the money to repay a substantial portion of his debts through a Chapter 13 plan. A debtor's ability to repay his debts out of future income is a primary factor in determining whether to dismiss for substantial abuse. Under § 707(b), the "granting of relief" refers to a discharge, not the relief associates with the commencement of the case under § 301, so the court should consider postpetition changes in the debtor's income.)
In re Cacioli, 463 F.3d 229 (2d Cir. Sept. 6, 2006) (Debtor's failure to maintain business records was justified due to his limited education and reasonable reliance on his business partner for record-keeping and was thus not grounds for denial of discharge pursuant to § 727(a)(3). Debtor's explanation of his loss of assets as a decline in the value of his partnership interest was satisfactory and credible and was thus not grounds for denial of discharge for failure to explain satisfactorily all relevant losses or deficiencies pursuant to § 727(a)(5).)
Watman v. Groman (In re Watman), 458 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. Aug. 21, 2006) (Bankruptcy court did not err in denying discharge under § 727(A)(2)(A), when, immediately pre-petition, debtor stopped operating his dental practice and opened a new dental practice in the same location with the same patients, employees, furniture, equipment and supplies. Debtor used prior practice's funds to prepay new practice's expenses. The transfers were made with the intent to hinder, delay or defraud judgment creditor of the debtor/prior practice in that the debtor took virtually all of the prior practice's assets and transferred them to the debtor's new corporation without consideration.)
In re Chauncey, 454 F.3d 1292 (11th Cir. July 7, 2006) (Eleventh Circuit upheld denial of discharge to debtor pursuant to § 727(a)(2)(A) and § 727(a)(3), where debtor could not account for her missing financial records and funneled personal injury settlement proceeds into her Florida home to shield them from and defraud her creditors.)
Marrama v. Citizens Bank (In re Marrama), 445 F.3d 518 (1st Cir. Apr. 20, 2006) (Bankruptcy Court did not err in granting summary judgment that debtor should be denied a discharge because he transferred assets to defraud creditors in violation of § 727(a)(2)(A). Debtor's invocation of Fifth Amendment did not require inference in Debtor's favor at summary judgment, where there was lack of any evidence to controvert substantial indicia of Debtor's intent to defraud creditors.)
