- Search with
- Parallel SearchEnter a full sentence between 5 and 30 words to find cases with conceptually similar sentences
- or
- Keyword SearchEnter keyword terms, accompanied by optional Boolean connectors
- ANDfraud AND damagesBoth terms in document
- ORcar OR automobileEither term in document
- NOTinfringement NOT patentTerm must not appear in document
- """due diligence"Exact match
- ()appeal AND (verdict OR judgment)Grouping terms
- *withdr*wSingle letter wildcard (withdraw, withdrew)
- !infring!Root expander (infringe, infringed, infringing)
- /ninvestor /5 diligenceTerms within n words of each other
- /sfees /s reasonableTerms within same sentence
- /padmissible /p warrantTerms within the same paragraph
In re Ontos, Inc.
Bankruptcy No. 04-10157, Appeal No. 05-11708-RGS., 05-11710-RGS (D. Mass. Feb. 3, 2006) In re Ontos, Inc.
1 Citing case
In re Zwirn
362 B.R. 536 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2007) Cited 24 timesHolding that actions for the recovery of the debtor's property by individual creditors under fraudulent conveyance laws would interfere with the estate and are stayed under section 362
" [I]t would be a strange and illogical interpretationof the law that recognized on the one hand theexclusive right of the Trustee to prosecute afraudulent transfer claim, while on the other denyinghim the power to settle or compromise that very sameclaim."In re Ontos, Inc., 2006 WL 276105 (D. Mass. 2006) (emphasis added). The Fifth Circuit in In re MortgageAmerica Corp., 714 F.2d 1266 (5th Cir. 1983) further explained the rationale for this logical approach as follows: