Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

In The Matter of: CONTRACTOR TECHNOLOGY LTD., Debtor. Cipriano G. Varela, doing business as Gube Trucking, Plaintiff-Appellant v. Ronald J. Sommers, Defendant-Appellee.

PER CURIAM:[fn*] [fn*] Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

We affirm the district court's judgment affirming the bankruptcy court's judgment avoiding unauthorized post-petition transfers under 11 U.S.C. § 549 in the amount of $85,456.35. Both courts correctly concluded that the funds held in the debtor's bank account on the petition date were property of the estate under 11 U.S.C. § 541 because, at a minimum, legal title to the funds was held by the debtor. The plaintiff-appellant's assertion that the funds at issue were trust funds under the Texas Trust Fund Statute and therefore excludable from property of the estate is, as the trustee argues, premature. The issue of whether a trust exists and the identity of its beneficiaries remains to be litigated. The plaintiff-appellant will have his day in court on that issue. The other matter that the plaintiff-appellant would like to pursue is whether the funds at issue were held by the debtor "as of the commencement of the case." That question, which is fact-intensive, was not raised in the bankruptcy court and is not properly before us.

AFFIRMED.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

IN RE CONTRACTOR TECH. LTD
(May 23, 2007)