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
 
Allied Fin., Inc. v. WM Capital Partners 53, LLC (In re Allied Fin., Inc.)
Allied Fin., Inc. v. WM Capital Partners 53, LLC (In re Allied Fin., Inc.). CHAPTER 11OPINION AND ORDERPlaintiff Allied Financial, Inc. seeks to exercise its redemption right under Article 1425 of the Puerto Rico Civil Code. WM Capital Partners 53, LLC purchased the litigated credit from Scotiabank de Puerto Rico, who had acquired it from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as receiver of R-G Premier Bank, a defunct financial institution. WM posits that federal receivership law preempts the right of redemption and if the Civil Code is not preempted, then Allied failed to timely reimburse the purchase price. The Court finds that Allied has timely asserted its redemption right, which is not preempted by federal law.UNCONTESTED FACTSOn April 30, 2010, the Office of the Commissioner of Financial
30-jun-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR2001837360
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. Montero (In re Reyes)
Rentas v. Montero (In re Reyes). CHAPTER 7OPINION AND ORDERPending before the court is a motion for summary judgment brought by the chapter 7 trustee (the "trustee") on her complaint to sell real property purchased by the debtor and his non-filing spouse pre-petition. (Adv. Dkt. No. 17.) For the reasons stated herein, the trustee's motion is hereby granted.I. JURISDICTIONThis court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 and 157(a), Local Civil Rule 83K(a), and the General Order of Referral of Title 11 Page 2 Proceedings to the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Puerto Rico, dated July 19, 1984 (Torruella, C.J.).1 This is a core
29-jun-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR217378915
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
Santiago v. ScotiaBank de P.R. (In re Santiago)
Santiago v. ScotiaBank de P.R. (In re Santiago). Chapter 13OPINION & ORDERBefore the court is Co-Defendant Motorambar, Incorporated's Summary Judgment Motion (hereinafter "Motorambar") [Dkt. No. 66]; Plaintiff/Debtor Shylene Marie Cox Santiago's Reply to Motion for Summary Judgment DKT 68 (hereinafter "Cox Santiago") [Dkt. No. 80]; Motorambar's Tendered Reply to Opposition to Summary Judgment Motion [Dkt. No. 84] and Co-Defendant Page 2 Scotiabank de Puerto Rico's Motion to Submit Position as to Co-Defendant's Summary Judgment Motion, Plaintiff's Opposition, and Co-Defendant's Reply (hereinafter "Scotiabank) [Dkt. No. 106].Factual BackgroundThe court determines that the following facts are not in
27-jun-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR108584784
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 Kersting
In re Kersting. CHAPTER 7OPINION AND ORDERThis case is before the court upon the Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof filed by Mr. Tirso R. Castillo (hereinafter referred to as "Mr. Castillo" or "Creditor") (Docket No. 61) and the Debtor's Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 70). Mr. Castillo argues that: (i) Debtor's motion for lien avoidance should be denied because the Debtor acquired her property interest after the lien was fixed to the real property. Therefore, the lien is not considered to impair Debtor's exemption under 11 U.S.C. §522(f)(1)(A) because the Debtor did not have a property interest at the time the lien was fixed since at the time ownership of the property was vested 100% in the conjugal partnership (which is a separate legal entity). Neither the Debtor nor her late husband had a property interest in
19-jun-2017 |  US Bankruptcy Court|Bankr. P.R.  |  2017USBR415429704
Ver Resumen de Documento | Abrir Documento | Descargar Documento a mi Computador | Guardar Documento en Mi Perfil | Enviar Documento por Correo Electrónico | Buscar Documentos Similares  
 
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  
 
Resultados 1 al 10 de 5595 (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