(United States Seventh Circuit) - Held that the sole owner of an electrical contracting company could discharge a debt in bankruptcy. The National Labor Relations Board had ordered him to provide backpay to employees he had terminated after their attempt to unionize the company. Affirmed that the debt was dischargeable in his Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that bankruptcy trustees are entitled to qualified immunity for personal harms caused by actions that, while not pursuant to a court order, fall within the scope of their official duties. Affirmed the dismissal of an adversary proceeding against a bankruptcy trustee.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed the dismissal of an appeal in a matter concerning the bankruptcy of a shipbuilding company. The bankruptcy court's approval of the sale of certain key estate assets was the final word on the subject, when the objector did not obtain a stay of that ruling.

(California Court of Appeal) - In a case where a creditor sought to collect a judgment, held that California's Uniform Voidable Transactions Act may apply to a fraudulent agreement between spouses to prevent collection of the debt. The debtor's premarital agreement here said that each spouse's earnings and other property acquired during marriage would not become community property.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that a contract to provide financial services was voidable because the company had failed to register as an investment adviser, as it was required to do under the Investment Advisers Act. Affirmed a ruling on this question in the company's bankruptcy proceeding.

(United States Second Circuit) - Held that a bankruptcy trustee may attempt to obtain property that Bernard Madoff's investment firm transferred to foreign entities that subsequently transferred it to other foreign entities. The transferees contended that the Bankruptcy Code's provisions did not extend extraterritorially in this manner. Disagreeing, the Second Circuit held that neither the presumption against extraterritoriality nor international comity principles barred the trustee from recovering in these consolidated actions. The panel vacated the bankruptcy court judgments and remanded.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Rejected a mootness argument in a dispute between an insolvent borrower and the holder of a mortgage note. Overruled In re River West Plaza-Chicago LLC, 664 F.3d 668 (7th Cir. 2011), holding that 11 U.S.C. section 363(m) does not make any dispute moot or prevent a bankruptcy court from deciding what shall be done with the proceeds of a sale or lease.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In the bankruptcy proceeding of a distributor of bulk petroleum products, held that a consignor's unperfected security interest in fuel and monetary proceeds was subordinate to the trustee's interest. Affirmed the judgment below.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Held that the City of Chicago, which sought to recoup thousands of dollars in parking and moving-violation fines incurred by seven bankruptcy debtors, was entitled to an order restoring their bankruptcy estates' assets to their personal ownership. Reversed the ruling below in these consolidated appeals.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - In a lien contest among creditors of a bankrupt commercial farm, held that a bank's lien outranked the agricultural liens of nurseries that sold the farm trees and shrubs. Affirmed a summary judgment ruling.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that a Chapter 7 bankruptcy debtor's ex-wives were not entitled to notice of his bankruptcy proceeding to assert claims for child support arrears, under the circumstances here. Affirmed the lower court rulings.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Held that a shareholder could not seek statutory damages from a creditor after helping a debtor company defend against an involuntary bankruptcy petition. Affirmed the decision below.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - In a lawsuit that a bankruptcy trustee brought against officers and directors of the debtor company and others who allegedly participated in a securities fraud scheme, affirmed a jury verdict in part and reversed it in part.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that a bankruptcy trustee could conduct a public auction of certain real estate owned by a Chapter 7 debtor, even though one of the tracts of land was already under contract. Affirmed the decisions below.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed a real estate business's Chapter 11 reorganization plan. Held that the plan was lawfully proposed even though a lessee illegally grew marijuana. Rejected a challenge brought by the United States Trustee.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Held that a Chapter 7 bankruptcy debtor was not entitled to a discharge of debt because of fraudulent omissions in financial disclosures. Affirmed a ruling after a bench trial.

(United States Second Circuit) - Held that judicial estoppel did not bar a Sarbanes-Oxley Act whistleblower retaliation claim. The issue centered on whether the plaintiff employee had attempted to conceal his whistleblower lawsuit from the court in his bankruptcy proceeding. Vacated a dismissal in relevant part.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Reversed and remanded. Plaintiff received over-payment of Social Security disability payments and the SSA sought to recoup the over-payment. Plaintiff claimed that the SSA collected the over-payment before considering plaintiff's waiver request. Plaintiff also filed for bankruptcy and lodged an adversarial proceeding against the SSA which the bankruptcy court dismissed. The issue for the Fifth circuit was whether the bankruptcy court had jurisdiction to hear plaintiff's claims. The Fifth circuit ruled that the bankruptcy court had jurisdiction and remanded to the bankruptcy court.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that a Chapter 13 debtor's attorneys were not entitled to be reimbursed for advancing the costs of filing fees, credit counseling fees and credit report fees. Affirmed the bankruptcy court, in this case involving a federal judicial district's "no-look fee" standing order.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a bankrupt company's rejection of a trademark licensing agreement did not deprive its licensee of the rights to use the trademark. The U.S. Supreme Court interpreted Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code, which enables a debtor to reject any executory contract, meaning a contract that neither party has finished performing. Justice Kagan delivered the opinion of the 8-1 Court.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - In the bankruptcy proceeding of an investment business that had committed securities fraud, revived some of the bankruptcy trustee's claims against individuals and entities that referred potential investors in exchange for sales commissions. Reversed a dismissal in relevant part.

(United States Supreme Court) - Clarified the circumstances in which a court may hold a creditor in civil contempt for attempting to collect a debt that a bankruptcy discharge order has immunized from collection. Held that there should be "no fair ground of doubt" that the order barred the creditor's conduct. Justice Breyer delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Held that bankruptcy debtors could not appeal the denial of their motion for sanctions, because they had not filed a petition for permission to appeal, as required under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8006(g). Criticized two circuit precedents that appeared to recognize exceptions to this procedural requirement.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that an energy company's Chapter 11 bankruptcy plan did not entitle a class of lenders to $30 million in post-petition default interest. Affirmed the rulings below.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Held that the City of Chicago violated the Bankruptcy Code's automatic stay when it continued to hold debtors' impounded vehicles until they paid their outstanding parking tickets. The city must return the vehicles to the debtors, the Seventh Circuit concluded in these four consolidated Chapter 13 bankruptcy cases.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. The Illinois Child Care Assistance Program could not collect overpayments made to debtors under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program who filed for bankruptcy.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. A bankruptcy judge did not commit clear error in finding that a trustee’s distributions to a third party while the company was insolvent were gratuitous, and there was no reason to overturn the imposition of discovery sanctions against the trustee.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirmed. A district court decision affirming a Bankruptcy Court order to remit funds to the trustee of a bankruptcy estate was part of the proceeds of an unauthorized post-petition transfer.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Reversed, vacated, and remanded. Holding that a creditor can establish that its expenses are attributable to the actions of the bankruptcy estate through evidence of either a direct request from the debtor-in-possession or other inducement via the knowing and voluntary post-petition acceptance of desired goods or services.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. A bankruptcy court's denial of a request to discharge a 60 year-old disabled former student's debt was affirmed. She failed to establish a showing of undue hardship. She had shown an inability to maintain a minimal standard of living because expenses exceeded income, but couldn't establish that her current condition would persist for a significant portion of the loan repayment period.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Reversed. A debtor's property cannot be excluded from the bankruptcy estate in cases involving contingent future interests.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. The bankruptcy court's rejection of a Texas Port Authority's claims of sovereign immunity and fraud in their gambit to invalidate a bankruptcy sale that extinguished an easement they held was affirmed because there was no Eleventh Amendment violation or basis to claim fraud.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed in part and reversed in part. A company that was unaware of a debt discharge in bankruptcy was not liable for continuing to attempt to collect on its debt, but one company who was notified and proceeded in state court could be held liable for actions taken by counsel on its behalf.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Vacated and remanded. Subject matter jurisdiction is determined when the federal court's jurisdiction is first invoked, so although subsequent changes eliminated the basis for jurisdiction the propriety at the time of filing supported the continuation of the case.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reversed. The panel held that the FDIC’s appeal was timely filed within 60 days of entry of the district court’s judgment because, even though acting solely as a receiver, the FDIC was a United States agency under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 4(a)(1)(B)(ii).

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirming the months-long search of a smartphone seized at the airport when customs agents found firearms parts in a man's luggage because the Fourth Amendment's border search exception applied and the search was justified by reasonable suspicion.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirming the summary judgment to an insurer that paid only half of a life insurance policy following the policy holder's death because the reduced coverage was the result of mistakes made by the employer, not the insurer, so the insurance company did not breach any duty it may have had under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Vacating relevant orders by the district court granting habeas relief and remanding with instructions to dismiss a habeas application with prejudice in a case involving a man, convicted for crimes he was committed when he was 15, that resulted in a 118 year sentence because although the Supreme Court prohibited jubenile offenders convicted of nonhomicide crimes from sentences of life without parole a partial pardon that reduced his sentence to 40 years rendered the habeas petition moot.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Vacating a district court's denial of a motion for attorney fees and remanding for consideration under the appropriate legal and evidentiary standards in a Lanham Act case in a suit relating to internet domain registry services because the district court required clear and convincing evidence of an exceptional case, rather than the Act's preponderance of the evidence standard.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirming the district court's denial of qualified immunity regarding alleged due process violations in the case of the firing of emergency personnel officers involved in a group text-message chain that questioned the competence to perform various emergency services, workout tips, sexual gibes, and other inappropriate content, but concluding that the district court erred in holding that officials were not entitled to qualified immunity as to First Amendment retaliation claims and reversing and remanding on those grounds.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Dismissing the appeal of a man for restitution to the sole contact victim of his various counts involving the sexual exploitation of children because he waived the right to appeal in taking his plea, but reversing the denial of restitution to non-contact victims because the district court's reasons for doing so contradict Supreme Court precedent and remanding for proceedings regarding the appropriate restitution amounts.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirming the district court's determination that a hospital did not fail to pay funds owed Medicate for the treatment of the plaintiff's mother, despite being a bit late in their payment, meaning that the plaintiff was not entitled to double damages under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirming the sentence of a man who was placed on supervision after serving a fifteen year prison sentence for a federal firearm conviction pursuant to the Armed Criminal Career Act and promptly violated the terms by threatening to kill his teenage daughter and her mother because his challenge to the underlying conviction was not within the jurisdiction of the court to consider and the new term of supervised release was not plainly unreasonable.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Vacating the sentence of a man as a career offender because he was improperly designated for the enhancement under the 206 United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Granting a petition for review, vacating an order of removal, and remanding a Board of Immigration Appeals finding a Salvadoran man ineligible for the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act because convictions for obstruction of justice did not qualify as crimes involving moral turpitude.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded. Plaintiff was shot several times during an encounter with the police. The police were responding to an emergency call that plaintiff had committed burglary and assault. Plaintiff sued alleging excessive force in violation of the Fourth Amendment and that the police conduct violated Maryland law. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendants holding that the police were enjoyed qualified immunity and no constitutional violations occurred. The appellate court held that the police violated plaintiffs Fourth Amendment rights, but that the police had qualified immunity. Because the trial court did not address the violation of the Fourth Amendment rights under Maryland law the case is remanded.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirmed. In this defamation action, plaintiff appealed from a judgment against her. Defendant, a television news agency, ran a news story about a county in Virginia hiring a plaintiff, a convicted felon and implying that she lied on her job application. Although plaintiff had a prior conviction she disclosed that on her application and was hired anyway. Plaintiff sued the news organization. The trial court ruled that plaintiff was a public figure and as such she would need to prove actual malice. The trial court granted defendants motion for directed verdict, concluding that plaintiff had failed to show actual malice. The appellate court agreed and affirmed the judgment.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirmed in part; vacated in part. US military personnel, civilian contractors and surviving family members brought suit for injuries allegedly caused by defendant’s waste management and water services across Iraq and Afghanistan. The district court concluded that the suit implicated a political question that was barred and that the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) preempts the Servicemember’s claims. The appellate court stated that federal courts will not examine cases involving political questions because that would encroach on prerogatives of Congress and the President, Baker v. Carr, 369 US 186. Because the case was barred as a political question, the issue of the FTCA preemption need not have been decided. The appellate court vacated the FTCA ruling and affirmed the political question ruling.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Reversed. Several environmental groups brought suit against the EPA for failing to perform duties under the Clean Water Act as to impaired waters in West Virginia. The district court found that plaintiffs have standing to bring the claim and granted summary judgment in their favor. The appellate court agreed that plaintiffs have standing, but reversed the grant of summary judgment. The appellate court reasoned that the doctrine of constructive submission under 33 USC section 1313(d)(2) which would have triggered the EPA’s duty to act was overcome by West Virginia’s partial compliance and agreement to do more. Therefore constructive submission would not apply and summary judgment improper.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirmed: In a plea deal, plaintiff pled guilty to possession of a firearm, but reserved the right to appeal the order denying his motion to suppress the weapon. Plaintiff argued that his motion was denied in error because the police lacked reasonable suspicion for seizure. The appellate court held that based on the totality of the circumstances and a tip from citizen informants the search and seizure was lawful. The motion to suppress was properly denied.