Microjuris Puerto Rico
 
Favor entrar Usuario y/o Clave


 
Leyes
   LPRA-Índice Dinámico
   LPR-Catálogo de Leyes
   Reglas
   Reglamentos
Decisiones
   DPR-Tribunal Supremo
   TA-Tribunal de Apelaciones
Trámite Legislativo
   eLegislativo
   Informes Legislativos
Federal
   US Supreme Court
   Circuit Courts
   District Court (PR)
   Bankruptcy (PR)
   USC
   CFR
Doctrina
   Revistas
Compendia
   Laboral
   Contributivo
   Ambiental
Servicios
   AYUDA
   SherLAWck-Alerts
   Web Mail


 
Guardar Búsquedas
 MJPR_Apelativo
 

IntelliSearch


¿Su consulta es en inglés?No
  • Búsqueda por:

Filtrar por:

Colección  
  • Todas  
  • LPRA
  • LPR
  • DPR
  • Apelaciones
  • Reglamentos
  • Revistas
  • OSJ
  • eLegislativo
  • Supreme Court-Federal
  • Circuit Courts-Federal
  • 1st Circuit-Federal
  • District Court-Federal
  • Bankruptcy-Federal
  • USC-Federal
  • CFR-Federal
Inicio » Resultados
Cambiar Tamaño del Texto Crear PDF de esta página Enviar esta página por Email Imprimir esta página
 
Rodriguez v. Jose Santiago Martinez Chapter 7 Tr. Roberto Roman Valentin (In re Rodriguez)
Rodriguez v. Jose Santiago Martinez Chapter 7 Tr. Roberto Roman Valentin (In re Rodriguez). CHAPTER 7OPINION AND ORDERAfter hearing the parties' arguments and taking into consideration the memoranda of law submitted by the parties [at Adv. Dkt. Nos. 37 & 39], the court grants the defendant's motion to dismiss [at Adv. Dkt. No. 19], now converted to a motion for summary judgment, and orders the entry of judgment dismissing the complaint.I. Uncontested FactsThe parties, at the hearing held on April 20, 2017 [at Adv. Dkt. No. 33], agreed to the following uncontested facts:The Superior Court of Ponce issued a post-judgment order in favor of defendant Jorge Santiago Martinez prohibiting the sale of several real
8-jun-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR1825790625
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Haro Inv. Corp v. Condado 3, LLC (In re Haro Inv. Corp)
Haro Inv. Corp v. Condado 3, LLC (In re Haro Inv. Corp). Chapter 11OPINION & ORDERBefore this court is a Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to FRBP 7012(b) [Dkt. No. 14] filed by Defendant, Condado 3, LLC ("Defendant" or "Condado"), Debtor/Plaintiff Haro Investment Corporation's ("Plaintiff" or "Haro") Reply to Motion to Dismiss Dkt. 14 [Dkt. No. 15], Defendant's Response to Plaintiff's Reply to Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to FRBP 7012(b)[Dkt. No. 16], and Plaintiff's Sur-Reply to Response in Support of Motion to Dismiss Dkt. 16 [Dkt. No. 17]. For the Page 2 reasons set forth below, Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Pursuant to FRBP 7012(b) is GRANTED.I. Factual BackgroundDebtor/Plaintiff, Haro Investment
6-jun-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR957335502
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Vazquez v. Oriental Bank (In re Vazquez)
Vazquez v. Oriental Bank (In re Vazquez). CHAPTER 13OPINION AND ORDERThe Plaintiffs, Jose Luis Quiles Vazquez and Raquel Eunice Dietsch Martínez (hereinafter, the "Debtors"), filed the instant adversary proceeding against the Defendant Oriental Bank (hereinafter, the "Oriental") alleging that it willfully violated the automatic stay by sending monthly account statements and demanding payment for a line of credit, since the filing of the bankruptcy petition (Docket No. 1). Before the Court are cross motions for summary judgment brought by Oriental and Debtors (Docket Nos. 18 and 27).1 The Court must address whether the account statements sent by Oriental were "an act to collect" in willful violation of the automatic stay. For the reasons stated herein, the Court denies Oriental's motion forPage 2
24-may-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR1635681576
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Rentas v. Coca Cola Co. (In re PMC Mktg. Corp)
Rentas v. Coca Cola Co. (In re PMC Mktg. Corp). Chapter 7OPINION & ORDERBefore this court is Defendant, The Coca Cola Company's ("TCCC") Emergency Motion to Expedite Consideration of Motion to Set Aside Judgment and Execution [Dkt. No. 36], Defendant's Motion requesting Entry of Order [Dkt. No. 37], Defendant's Motion to Set Aside Judgment and Execution [Dkt. No. 38], Plaintiff/Trustee's Opposition to Motion to Set Aside Judgment and Page 2 Execution [Dkt. No. 42], and Defendant's Reply to Opposition to Motion to Set Aside Judgment ana Execution [Dkt. No. 46]. For the reasons set forth below, the Defendant's Motion to Set Aside Judgment and Execution [Dkt. No. 38] is DENIED.I. FACTSOn March 2,
10-may-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR1963128153
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Gonzalez v. L&R Dev. & Inv. Corp (In re L&R Dev. & Inv. Corp)
Gonzalez v. L&R Dev. & Inv. Corp (In re L&R Dev. & Inv. Corp). Chapter 11OPINION & ORDERBefore the court is Hector Noel Roman-Ramos' ("Removing Defendant") Notice of Removal [Dkt. No. 1] of case number CFCD2015-0070 from the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Court of First Instance, Arecibo Part, Superior Court ("State Court Case") to the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Puerto Rico pursuant to 28 U.S.C §§ 1334, 1452 and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9027; Debtor L&R Page 2 Development & Investment Corporation's Opposition to Removal filed by Mr. Ramon Ramos (The Roman Defendants) and Request for Abstention [Dkt. No. 7] ("Debtor"); Plaintiff's Javier Hernandez Gonzalez and Gwendolyn Bujosa Gonzalez ("Plaintiffs") Opposition to Removal by Defendant Roman-Perez; Request for Abstention and Remand [Dkt. No. 9]; and Removing Defendant's
8-may-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR1374473228
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Banco Cooperativo De P.R. v. Herrera (In re Herrera)
Banco Cooperativo De P.R. v. Herrera (In re Herrera). CHAPTER 7OPINION AND ORDERBefore the court is a motion to dismiss the instant adversary proceeding filed by the defendant Hipólito Ramos Herrera (hereinafter "Defendant") (Docket No. 11) and an opposition filed by the plaintiff Banco Cooperativo de Puerto Rico (hereinafter "Plaintiff"). For the reasons stated herein, the court dismisses the adversary proceeding for failure to state a claim.In the complaint, Plaintiff asserts two grounds to object to Defendant's discharge. Count one is an objection to discharge in accordance with the court's Orders dated September 6 and 29, 2016 (Docket Nos. 153 & 156, Case No. 15-02987). Count two is an objection to discharge due to the pending objection to Defendant's claim of exemptions in the legal case. Page 2
27-abr-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR912641372
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
In re Julio Enrique Gil De Lamadrid Perez
In re Julio Enrique Gil De Lamadrid Perez. CHAPTER 13OPINION AND ORDERBowles Custom Pools & Spa, Inc. ("Bowles") moved for conversion to chapter 7 of the instant chapter 13 case. (Docket No. 331.) The Municipal Revenue Collection Center ("CRIM") joined (Docket No. 341). Julio Enrique Gil de Lamadrid Perez ("Debtor") initially opposed the conversion then moved for voluntary dismissal, pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1307(b).1Debtor argues that when a debtor in a chapter 13 case moves for voluntary dismissal under Section 1307(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, he may exercise this option, as of right, and the case must be terminated. Bowles and CRIM timely opposed Debtor's voluntary dismissal. Bowles contends that Debtor's voluntary dismissal should be denied on three grounds: (1)
24-abr-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR1219739391
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Coop A/C Caguas v. Rivera (In re Rivera)
Coop A/C Caguas v. Rivera (In re Rivera). Chapter 13OPINION & ORDERBefore this court is Plaintiff Cooperativa de Ahorro y Credito de Caguas' ("COOP") Motion for Summary Judgment; Motion Submitting Documents; and Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkts. No. 12, 13, 14]. This motion was unopposed by the Page 2 Defendants despite receiving notice1 of the Motion and time to object. For the reasons set forth below, the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, in part.The role of summary judgment is to look behind the facade of the pleadings and assay the parties' proof in order to determine whether a trial is required. Under Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule 56(c), made applicable in bankruptcy by Fed. R.
7-abr-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR1046373790
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Oriental Bank v. Lopez (In re Lopez)
Oriental Bank v. Lopez (In re Lopez). Chapter 11OPINION & ORDERBefore this Court is Plaintiff Oriental Bank's Motion for Summary Judgment [Dkt. No. 41]. This Motion was technically unopposed by the Defendant despite receiving notice1 of the Motion and time to object. For the reasons set forth below, the Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED, in part.Page 2 The role of summary judgment is to look behind the facade of the pleadings and assay the parties' proof in order to determine whether a trial is required. Under Fed. R. Civ. P., Rule 56(c), made applicable in bankruptcy by Fed. R. Bankr. P., Rule 7056, a summary judgment is available if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, and admissions on file, together with the
5-abr-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR1602496414
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Empresas Martinez Valentin Corp. v. PC P.R. LLC (In re Empresas Martinez Valentin Corp.)
Empresas Martinez Valentin Corp. v. PC P.R. LLC (In re Empresas Martinez Valentin Corp.). OPINION AND ORDERI. Procedural History.Empresas Martínez Valentín Corp. ("Empresas Martínez," "debtor," or "plaintiff") is a Puerto Rico corporation that owns real property in Sabana Grande, Puerto Rico, containing a gasoline service station. The property was subject to a long-term lease agreement entered into by the prior owner with Texaco Puerto Rico, Inc., which has since changed its name to PC Puerto Rico, LLC ("PC Puerto Rico").1Page 2 On August 19, 2011, Empresas Martínez filed a petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. (Bankr. Dkt. No. 1.) Shortly thereafter, on August 31, 2011, the debtor filed
4-abr-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR2109377201
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Resultados 1 al 10 de 5651 (aprox.)Página: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 >>

Política de Privacidad |   Términos y Condiciones  |    @FaceBook |   @Twitter | Sitemap   |    Últimas entradas (RSS)   |    Blog Corporativo

INICIO

MI PERFIL

BÚSQUEDA POR:

QUÉ OFRECEMOS PRODUCTOS SERVICIOS AYUDA CONTÁCTANOS
 

» Prueba la nueva versión de Microjuris.com OK