Legal Opinion
In re Uiterwyk Corp.
United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida
Decided January 17, 1986No. Bankruptcy No. 83-166PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER DENYING AMENDED MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION
A. JAY CRISTOL, Bankruptcy Judge.
This matter has come before the court upon amended motion for reconsideration, through counsel, by claimant, Charles H. Molho, d/b/a Manhattan Ship Supply.
Counsel states that his failure to attend hearing relating to debtor’s objection to the claim filed by his client to be heard on August 2, 1985 at 10:00 a.m., was due to his own inadvertence and neglect because he became involved in reviewing another client’s case. Carelessness is not synonymous with excusable neglect. Kohlbeck v. Handley, 3 Ariz.App. 469, 415…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Dudley v. StilesMontana Supreme Court · 1963
- Kohlbeck v. HandleyCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1966
- Motiograph, Inc. v. MatthewsCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1977
- Boyd v. MarshCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1980
- Scott v. Seabreeze Pools, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1974
3Cited by7 opinions
- United States v. Motor Freight Express (In Re Motor Freight Express)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1988
- Aponte v. Aungst (In Re Aponte)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1988
- Sibson v. Midland Mortgage Co. (In Re Sibson)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · 1999
- Bautista v. Midfirst Bank (In Re Bautista)United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida · 1999
- Tamarkin v. Wells (In Re Wells)United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1988
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.