Legal Opinion

Lawrence Arms Associates v. Shur (In re Shur)

United States Bankruptcy Court, E.D. New York

Decided September 28, 1998No. Bankruptcy No. 194-12633-352; Adversary No. 194-1306-352Published

1Opinion of the Court

DECISION

MARVIN A. HOLLAND, Bankruptcy Judge.

Pursuant to a Rules 34(c) and 45 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Fed. R.Civ.P.”), made applicable in bankruptcy by Rules 7034 and 9016 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (“Fed.R.Bankr.P.”). Lawrence Arms Associates has moved for an order to compel Barry Brahver (“Brahver”), debtor Esther Shur’s nonparty spouse, to respond to discovery attempts. Movant seeks information relating to any transfers of property between Brahver and Shur as well *297as any business transactions between the two for use in this adversary proceeding seeking a…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Oppenheimer Fund, Inc. v. SandersSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Trammel v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. United States v. Construction Products Research, Inc. Five Star Products, Inc. And H. Nash BabcockCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
  4. Micro Motion, Incorporated v. Kane Steel Co., Inc., Cross/appellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
  5. Riddell Sports Inc. v. BrooksDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1994

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API