Legal Opinion

In Re Neumann

United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota

Decided January 13, 1984No. 19-40146PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO EXTEND TIME

ROBERT J. KRESSEL, Bankruptcy Judge.

This matter is before the court on the motion of the First National Bank of Minneapolis to extend the time in which it may file a complaint to determine the discharge-ability of the debtor’s debt to the bank. No notice of the motion was given to the debt- or. However, since the disposition of the motion is clearly compelled by the Bankruptcy Rules and is adverse to the moving party, no purpose would be served by requiring notice to the debtor.

The bank claims that the debtor’s debt is nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C.…

2Cited by5 opinions

  1. DeLesk v. Rhodes (In Re Rhodes)United States Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
  2. Austin Farm Center, Inc. v. Harrison (In Re Harrison)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 1987
  3. Dole v. Grant (In Re Summit Corp.)District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1990
  4. Ware Co-Operative Bank v. Smith (In Re Smith)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · 1984
  5. Suburban Bank of Cary-Grove v. Riggsby (In Re Riggsby)District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API