11 U.S.C. § 101

A corporation is an insider of an individual debtor when the debtor is its director, officer, or person in control.

Bombardier Capital, Inc. v. Rodi (In Re Rodi) · filed 1994-02-01(31)(A)(iv)

An “insider” is defined as a “corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer or person in control.”' 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv). Since Rodi is the director and president of Lighthouse Marine, this statement respecting Lighthouse Marine’s condition is actionable under § 523(a)(2)(B).

Section 101(31)(B)(iv) treats a partnership in which a corporate debtor is a general partner as an insider of that debtor.

Sender v. Buchanan (In Re Hedged-Investments Associates, Inc.) · filed 1994-02-02(31)(B)(iv)

The Plaintiff asserts the limited partnerships were “creditors” of HIA, Inc., and that under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(iv) the limited partnerships were “insiders” of HIA, Inc. Further, it is asserted, the payments to Defendant were transfers to or for the benefit of the limited partnerships. Thus, Plaintiff attempts to gain the one-year look back period under § 547. In this case the limited partnerships were creditors of HIA, Inc., and payments here to Defendant were transfers for the benefit of an “insider.” Thus, the Plaintiff is not limited to the 90-day look back period of § 547(b)(5)(A), but is entitled to a one-year look back period to August 30, 1989.

Section 101(31) does not list a relative’s probate estate as an insider of an individual debtor, though the estate may qualify based on its relationship with the debtor.

Sticka v. Anderson (In Re Anderson) · filed 1994-03-21(31)

When the debtor is an individual, the probate estate of a relative is not included within the Code’s definition of “insider”. Given the hostility between Ronald, acting on behalf of the probate estate, and the debtor, which existed when the transfer occurred as well as the circumstances leading up to the Writ of Attachment, it is clear that the probate estate did not exercise sufficient control over the affairs of the debtor so as to render the probate estate an insider.

Section 101(31)(B) includes a person who controls a corporate debtor within the definition of an insider.

Hallock v. Key Federal Savings Bank (In Re Silver Oak Homes, Ltd.) · filed 1994-04-14(31)(B)

Mr. and Mrs. Hallock were insiders of the debtor, 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B), as persons who exercised control over the corporation.

Section 101(31)(B) includes a corporate debtor’s directors as insiders and can reach a company represented by its officer on the debtor’s board.

Committee of Creditors Holding Unsecured Claims v. Citicorp Venture Capital, Ltd. (In Re Papercraft Corp.) · filed 1994-04-22(31)(B)

CVC held its insider status through Muqaddam, CVC’s representative on Debtor’s board of directors, who is an insider by statutory definition. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B).

Section 101(31)(C) does not treat an accounting firm with an arm’s-length relationship to a partnership debtor as an insider.

In Re Dean · filed 1994-04-28(31)(C)

The Court finds that the accounting firm is not an insider or an affiliate of the debtor as defined in Code § 101(31)(C).

Section 101(31) treats a corporate debtor’s director as an insider.

In Re Runaway II, Inc. · filed 1994-05-20(31)

Ackerson is a 50% shareholder and a director of the Debtor. He is an insider.

Section 101(31)(F) treats a debtor’s managing agent as an insider.

In Re Interwest Business Equipment, Inc. · filed 1994-05-02(31)(F)

As a manager of Green Street, Retail is an "insider" of that debtor within the meaning of 11 U.S.C.A. Sec. 101(31)(F) ("managing agent of the debtor")

For a partnership debtor, § 101(31)(C)(ii) includes relatives of a general partner among insiders.

In the Matter of Woodbrook Associates, Debtor-Appellant · filed 1994-05-12(31)(C)(ii)

Where the debtor is a partnership, insiders include “relatives of a general partner in, general partner of, or person in control of the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(C)(ii). Any affirmative vote from Deci-Ma Corporation and Deci-Ma Management must be discounted as an insider vote.

Section 101(31)’s definition of “insider” determines whether the extended preference period applies to a creditor.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors Ex Rel. S. Galeski Optical Co. v. Estate of Galeski (In Re S. Galeski Optical · filed 1994-06-21(31)

Since the Galeski Estate is not an “insider” as it is defined under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31), Section 547(b)(4) states that in order for the $35,567.00 transfer to be preferential it must have taken place within ninety days of the debtor’s bankruptcy filing.

A corporation wholly owned and controlled by an individual debtor qualifies as an insider under Section 101(31)(A)(iv).

Bankr. L. Rep. P 76,030 in Re Edsel Adams and Frances T. Adams, Debtors. Barclays/american Business Credit, Inc. v. Edse · filed 1994-08-03(31)(A)(iv)

Edsel Adams wholly owned and controlled Adams Plywood. Adams Plywood thus qualifies as an insider, and the bankruptcy court was correct in considering the Adams Plywood accounts receivables to be properly of the Adamses under Section 727(a)(2), by incorporation through Section 727(a)(7).

For an individual debtor, the definition of insider includes relatives such as the debtor’s wife, sister-in-law, mother, and uncle.

Congress Talcott Corp. v. Sicari (In Re Sicari) · filed 1994-09-14(31)(A)(i)

Esther Sicari is his wife, Diane Cagliuso is his sister-in-law, Santa Salerno is his mother and Emanuel Sicari is his uncle. All are “relatives” and “insiders” within the purview of 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(i).

Section 101(31) defines insider status by a claim holder’s relationship to the debtor; that status does not automatically pass to someone who buys the claim.

Concord Square Apartments of Wood County, Ltd. v. Ottawa Properties, Inc. (In Re Concord Square Apartments of Wood Count · filed 1994-09-21(31)

In conclusion, the fact that a transfer by assignment has been made from an “insider” claim-holder to a third party does not make the third party transferee an “insider” as a matter of law. The status of the claim-holder is not imputed to the transferee, but is a matter of fact to be determined from evidence of the relationship between the debtor and the third-party transferee under the statutory language and legislative policy set forth in 11 U.S.C. §§ 101(31) and 1129(a)(10).

A lender does not become an insider merely by exercising financial control incident to the debtor-creditor relationship.

LW-SP2, L.P. v. Krisch Realty Associates, L.P. (In Re Krisch Realty Associates, L.P.) · filed 1994-10-25(31)(C)(v)

The mere exercise by a lender of financial control over a debtor incident to the debtor-creditor relationship does not make the lender an insider.

Section 101(31)’s definition of “insider” is illustrative and applies flexibly based on the person’s relationship with the debtor.

Pan Am Corp. v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. · filed 1994-12-23(31)

Although the Bankruptcy Code defines the term “insider,” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31), ... courts have uniformly held that the Bankruptcy Code’s definition is merely illustrative and that the term “insider” must be flexibly applied on a case-by-case basis.

Section 101 defines which relatives of a corporate debtor’s controllers qualify as insiders.

Central Cooperatives, Inc. v. Irwin (In Re Colonial Poultry Farms) · filed 1995-01-17(31)(B), (45)

Here, Mary Irwin qualifies as an insider, which subjects her claim to this Court’s rigorous scrutiny.

Section 101(31)(B)'s categories of corporate insiders are not exhaustive, but extensive involvement in a debtor's affairs does not alone establish insider status.

Dressel Associates, Inc. v. Beaver Valley Builder's Supply, Inc. (In Re Beaver Valley Builder's Supply, Inc.) · filed 1995-02-09(31)(B)

Consequently, the six (6) categories of corporate insider set forth at § 101(31) are not exhaustive. ... Reinert’s extensive involvement, as detailed above, does not compel the conclusion that his relationship with BVBS was “sufficiently close” to warrant subjecting his actions vis-a-vis BVBS to closer scrutiny than the actions of anyone who dealt with BVBS on an arm’s length basis.

Section 101(31) includes a corporate debtor’s officers among its insiders.

Ansel Properties, Inc. v. Nutri/System of Florida Associates (In Re Nutri/System of Florida Associates) · filed 1995-02-16(31)(B)(ii)

The Bankruptcy Court found that Heisley was an insider. This finding is clearly correct considering that Heisley was the chairman of the board and chief executive officer of N/S during the period of the inequitable ... conduct of which the appellants are complaining.

Section 101(31)(A) does not make an individual debtor’s friend an insider solely because of the friendship.

Pfeiffer v. Thomas (In Re Reinbold) · filed 1995-05-18(31)(A)

Thomas does not fit into one of the four categories listed in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A), as was brought out at trial with both Thomas and Reinbold testifying they were not related, partners, or participants in a corporate endeavor. ... Furthermore, ease law demonstrates that friendship alone is insufficient to confer insider status — a de facto or de jure family relationship is required.

A person with a close or special relationship with an individual debtor may be an insider even if they are not a relative.

Gennet v. Docktor (In Re Levy) · filed 1995-07-18(31)(A)(i)

However, numerous courts have interpreted this provision liberally to include individuals having a close or special relationship with a debtor. ... This Court therefore concludes that Defendant was an insider of the Debtor on January 26,1989, the date upon which the Debtor’s transfer to Defendant became effective.

Section 101(31)'s insider definition is nonexclusive and can include a law firm whose close involvement with a debtor goes beyond an ordinary attorney-client relationship.

In Re Dunes Hotel Associates · filed 1995-09-21(31)

Section 101(31) includes a list of insiders of a debtor partnership. However, § 102(3) states that “includes” is not limiting. Section 101(31) is not exclusive. ... It is precisely the kind of close relationship that appears to be covered by the statutory definition of insider.

A person whose special relationship gives him sufficient control over a corporate debtor may be an insider.

Winick v. Daddy's Money of Clearwater, Inc. (In Re Daddy's Money of Clearwater, Inc.) · filed 1995-10-02(31)(B)(iii)

This Court concludes from the record that Winick had a special relationship that gave him sufficient control over the debt of Moss to deem Winick an insider as a matter of law.

Section 101(31)(B) includes an entity with a sufficiently close relationship to a corporate debtor within the definition of an insider.

Committee of Creditors Holding Unsecured Claims v. Citicorp Venture Capital, Ltd. (In Re Papercraft Corp.) · filed 1995-10-12(31)(B)

We find that the facts establish that CVC had a “sufficiently close relationship” with Debtor to constitute CVC a statutory insider.

Section 101(31)(A) includes an individual debtor’s relatives within the third degree as insiders.

Eide v. Mason (In Re Mason) · filed 1995-11-30(31)(A)

The transfer was made within the one-year preference period for transfers to insiders. See 11 U.S.C. §§ 101(31)(A), 101(45) (“insider” includes individual related within third degree).

Section 101(30)(B) gives an illustrative definition of a corporate insider that courts apply flexibly on a case-by-case basis.

9281 Shore Road Owners Corp. v. Seminole Realty Co. (In Re 9281 Shore Road Owners Corp.) · filed 1995-10-16(30)(B)

The Code defines an insider as an officer, director or person in control of the debtor. 11 U.S.C. Section 101(30)(B). However, this definition is merely illustrative and the term insider should be flexibly applied on a case by case basis.

Section 101(31)(A)(iv) includes a corporation among an individual debtor’s insiders when the debtor is its director, officer, or person in control.

Mark Twain Kansas City Bank v. Schwarten (In Re Schwarten) · filed 1996-02-28(31)(A)(iv)

An insider of an individual debt- or includes "a corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv). ... However, because the Schwartens apparently concede that they were officers of Sonic Technologies this element of § 523(a)(2)(B) was therefore satisfied and summary judgment in favor of Mark Twain was properly granted.

Section 101(31) includes a debtor’s relative in the definition of an insider.

Ellenberg v. Bouldin (In Re Bouldin) · filed 1996-03-15(31)

Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(31), a relative of the debtor is an insider.

A partnership debtor's control over a creditor can support a finding that the creditor is an insider under § 101(31)(C).

In re Greer West Inv. Ltd. Partnership · filed 1996-03-25(31)(C)

We therefore conclude that control by a Chapter 11 debtor over a creditor can properly support a finding of insider status.

Section 101(31)(A) includes an individual debtor’s relative as an insider.

Graham v. Marshall (In Re Marshall) · filed 1996-04-03(31)(A)

The Debtor’s transfer of the trailer to an insider as defined in § 101(31)(A), with the apparent lack of consideration, the restriction against alienation, the direction for distribution upon death, and the subsequent reacquisition after the bankruptcy, all lead to the conclusion that the Trustee has demonstrated all the elements of the causes of action, including that Debtor possessed the requisite intent to defraud creditors, and that the Debtor was or became insolvent as a result of the transfer.

Section 101(31)(A)(iv) includes as an individual debtor's insider a corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.

Staten Island Savings Bank v. Scarpinito (In Re Scarpinito) · filed 1996-06-03(31)(A)(iv)

Scarber, Scarpi and Beroza are "insiders" of Scarpinito. The Bankruptcy Code defines an insider of an individual debtor to include a corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.

A bank does not become an insider of a debtor merely by requiring the debtor’s officers to guarantee its loan.

Houston Heavy Equipment Co., Inc. v. Gould · filed 1996-07-12(31)(B)

The code carefully defines who is an insider, and Fidelity does not meet the criteria. Nothing about obtaining a guaranty for a loan makes a bank an insider to the debtor.

A creditor's control of a debtor must be sufficient to make the creditor a fiduciary before the creditor qualifies as an insider.

Clemens v. West Milton State Bank (In Re Clemens) · filed 1996-06-10(31)

With this background, we must first examine whether the Bank exercised such control over the Plaintiffs affairs that it became a fiduciary of the Plaintiff. ... We simply cannot find such control as to allow us to make a finding that the Bank was an insider of the Plaintiff.

Section 101(31)(E) treats a debtor’s affiliate as an insider; common ownership can establish affiliate status under § 101(2)(B).

Redmond v. Ellis County Abstract & Title Co. (In Re Liberty Livestock Co.) · filed 1996-07-02(31)(E)

Further, the definition of “insider” includes affiliates or insiders of affiliates. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(E). Affiliate is further defined as a “corporation 20 percent or more of whose outstanding voting securities are directly or indirectly owned, controlled, or held with power to vote ... by an entity that directly or indirectly owns, controls, or holds with power to vote, 20 percent or more of the outstanding voting securities of the debtor; ...” 11 U.S.C. § 101(2)(B). An “entity” includes a person. 11 U.S.C. § 101(15). Barbara Wasinger was the sole shareholder of Liberty Livestock and ECA. Thus, ECA was an affiliate of Liberty Livestock, such that the Trustee may pursue transfers to ECA that occurred within the one year period before Liberty Livestock filed its bankruptcy petition.

Section 101(31)(B) includes a corporate debtor’s director, officer, or person in control as an insider.

Matter of Concrete Products, Inc. · filed 1996-07-02(31)(B)

It is without question that Zell has been an insider since he assumed his position on the board of directors in 1989. In pertinent part, 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B) provides that if the debtor is a corporation an “insider” includes a director, officer, or person in control of the debtor.

Under § 101(31), a corporation may remain an individual debtor’s insider after the debtor resigns as its officer and director if their relationship remains sufficiently close.

In the Matter of Robert P. Krehl, Debtor-Appellant · filed 1996-08-01(31)(A)(iv)

We believe that when a control person resigns in this way, a court should look to all of the circumstances to determine whether the relationship between the individual and the corporate entity remains so close that the two could not be said to be dealing at arms length. The bankruptcy court did so here and properly concluded that RTI must be considered an insider in connection with Krehl’s personal bankruptcy despite Krehl’s resignation and the subsequent appointment of a receiver.

For an individual debtor, a corporation of which the debtor is an officer or person in control is an insider.

Consumers United Capital Corp. v. Greene (In Re Greene) · filed 1996-09-13(31)(A)(iv)

As Debt- or is an individual and both an officer and a “person in control” of Incontacare, it follows that Incontacare was an insider of Debtor for purposes of § 727(a)(7).

Section 101(31) treats a corporation as an insider of an individual debtor when the debtor is its president.

Armbrustmacher v. Redburn (In Re Redburn) · filed 1996-12-06(31)(A)(iv)

As Mr. Redbum was president of RAL, RAL qualifies as an "insider.”

Section 101(31)'s definition of insider is nonexhaustive, and an extra-statutory insider need not control the debtor.

Koch v. Rogers (In Re Broumas) · filed 1996-12-20(31)

As Chief Judge Mannes noted, the definition section of “insider” in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) is nonexhaustive. ... Contrary to Defendants’ contention, actual control is not a predicate to finding someone to be an extra-statutory insider. Insider status, as Chief Judge Mannes stated, is determined by factual inquiry into the debtor’s relationship with the alleged insider.

A corporate debtor’s chief executive officer’s daughter is an insider under Section 101(31)(B)(vi).

In Re Federal Roofing Co., Inc. · filed 1996-12-17(31)(B)(vi)

Ms. Crain is the daughter of the principal and chief executive officer. Ms. Crain is an insider as that term is defined in 11 U.S.C. 101(31)(B)(vi).

Limited partners who hold a debtor partnership’s promissory notes are not automatically insiders under § 101(31)(C).

In Re Cold Harbor Associates, L.P. · filed 1997-01-16(31)(C)

At the outset, the Court notes that none of the parties holding these purported promissory notes would be considered insiders under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(C), so whether this proffered obligation actually does represent a claim against the debtor will depend upon whether the noted created a debt or equity relationship.

Section 101(31) defines insiders of a partnership through a nonexhaustive list; a sufficiently close relationship with the debtor can establish insider status.

In Re Hillside Park Apts., L.P. · filed 1997-02-10(31)

The term “insider” is defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). ... Here, the Court finds that Grand Court is an insider of Hillside. ... In this case, Grand Court and Hillside are so closely connected that Grand Court is under Hillside’s “proverbial thumb” and 'will cast whatever vote Hillside wants it to cast.

Section 101(31) does not make a financial consultant an insider of a corporate debtor when the consultant cannot control corporate decisions and the parties deal at arm’s length.

Ellenberg v. William Goldberg & Co. (In Re Sullivan Haas Coyle, Inc.) · filed 1997-03-07(31)(B)(iii)

Applying these concepts of “control” to the case at bar, the court concludes that the defendants here were not “persons in control” of the debtor within the meaning of § 101(31)(B)(iii).

Section 101(31)(B)'s list of corporate insiders is not exclusive.

Gray v. Chace (In Re Boston Publishing Co.) · filed 1997-05-02(31)(B)

The list of persons or entities that may be insiders, which is set forth in § 101(31)(B), is not exclusive.

Section 101’s insider definition covers a partnership debtor’s principal who is a limited partner and controls its corporate general partner.

Roffman v. Butler (In Re ROPT Ltd. Partnership) · filed 1997-06-19(31)

As to ROPT Roffman was unquestionably an "insider” within the meaning of the Code. See §§ 101(31)(C)(v), (E), (F); 101(2).

Section 101(31)'s definition of insider can include a creditor whose close relationship with the debtor is akin to that of a relative.

718 Arch Street Associates, Ltd. v. Blatstein (In Re Main, Inc.) · filed 1997-09-08(31)

We would ... therefore classify a creditor whose relationship is that of a very close friend of the family who provides funds whenever they are needed as akin to that of a “relative” in the definition of “insider” appearing in 11 U.S.C. §§ 101(31)(A)(i), (B)(vi).

Section 101(31)(C) does not treat a limited partner as an insider of a partnership unless the partner fits one of the listed categories.

Herzog v. Leighton Holdings, Ltd. (In Re Kids Creek Partners, L.P.) · filed 1997-09-23(31)(C)

The definition of insider does ... not include a limited partner who does not otherwise fit the definition of insider.

Under § 101(31)(A)(iv), a corporation that gives an individual debtor the title of managing director can be treated as an insider despite later denying that the debtor was a director or officer.

In Re Wolkowitz v. Soll, Rowe, Price, Raffel & Browne, Inc. (In Re Fink) · filed 1997-09-25(31)(A)(iv)

Where the debtor is an individual, insiders include “any corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv) (West 1997). At the time that the $50,000 transfer was made, Fink had the title of “Managing Director” at Soil Rowe. Soli Rowe contends that in fact Fink was neither a director nor an officer at that time, and that it gave Fink this title only “to assist him in his relationships with his customers.” The court holds that Soil Rowe is estopped to make this argument, because it clothed Jonathan Fink with this title. Soli Rowe should not be surprised to be required to bear the consequences of the title that it bestowed on Fink. The court finds that Soli Rowe was an insider with respect to Fink, in consequence of this title.

Section 101(31) does not make a debtor’s longtime counsel an insider solely because counsel knows the debtor’s business affairs when counsel lacks control or decision-making power.

JER WHTR SERVICES, INC. v. Lavin · filed 1997-10-17(31)

Sullivan served as the Debtor’s legal counsel for approximately six years, representing the Debtor with respect to the sale of estate assets, the leasing of estate assets and negotiations with creditors. He was privy to the most intimate, proprietary details of the Debtor’s business transactions and finances. •Sullivan did not, however, have the control or decision making powers which would mark the kind of relationship designated in the Code. The Bankruptcy Court’s finding that Sullivan was not an “insider” is not, therefore, clearly erroneous.

Section 101 includes an individual debtor’s son in its definition of an insider.

Casey v. Kasal (In Re Kasal) · filed 1998-02-20(31)(A)(i)

The payments and other transfers to the Son should have been disclosed, either under paragraph 3b, concerning payments to insider creditors in the past year, since the Son clearly is an insider pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(a)(i); or under paragraph 7, relating to gifts over $200.

Section 101(31)(A)'s list of insiders is non-exhaustive; a sufficiently close relationship with the debtor can establish insider status.

Rogers v. Koch · filed 1998-02-24(31)(A)

The fact that Rogers does not fall into any of these categories is of no moment because, as just stated, this is a non-exhaustive list. ... The evidence in this case fully supports the bankruptcy court's finding that Rogers was an insider with respect to Broumas.

Section 101(31) treats a debtor’s spouse as an insider whose conduct receives greater scrutiny because of that close relationship.

Allnutt v. Associates Leasing, Inc. (In Re Allnutt) · filed 1998-03-20(31)

As the wife of the debtor, the plaintiff is an insider who shares with him an identity of interest. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). As an insider, the plaintiff’s close relationship with the debtor subjects her conduct to greater scrutiny than those dealing with the debtor at arm’s length.

Section 101(31) includes a debtor’s wife as an insider.

Krudy v. Scott (In Re Scott) · filed 1998-05-20(31)

Brenda Scott (“Mrs. Scott”) is the wife of the Debtor, and is an “insider” as that term is defined in 11 U.S.C. Section 101(31).

A corporate director is an insider without having to act as the debtor corporation’s alter ego.

Goode v. Hagerty (In Re Systems Impact, Inc.) · filed 1998-07-27(31)(B)(i)

A director's status as an insider under the definition of Code § 101(31)(B) is sufficient to invoke this principle; it is not necessary that the director act as an alter ego of the debtor corporation.

Section 101(31)(B) includes a person who controls a corporate debtor within the definition of an insider.

Liberty Mutual Insurance v. Leroy Holding Co. (In Re Fort Ann Express Inc.) · filed 1998-07-31(31)(B)

When the debtor is a corporation, the Bankruptcy Code defines insider to include, inter alia, a person in control of the debtor. ... Leroy Holding’s domination of Fort Ann from July 1, 1995 to June 29, • 1996 constituted Leroy Holding as an insider during that period.

A creditor linked through common ownership to a company that manages a corporate debtor can be treated as an insider.

Dzikowski v. Tri-O-Clean Systems, Inc. (In Re Tri-O-Clean, Inc.) · filed 1998-09-29(31)(B)(iii)

However, AMEX is owned by Manuel Caldera who also owns the Caldera Company. The Caldera Company performed the day to day management duties of the Debtor including the maintenance of the books and records which would evidence how the Debtor spent the proceeds of the loan. Based upon the lack of documentation showing how the proceeds of the loans were expended, the Defendants have failed to meet their burden of proving that the transactions were executed in good faith.

A partnership debtor’s insiders include more than its general partners, so a finding that a creditor is not a general partner does not rule out insider status.

Hoffman v. Astroline Co. (In re Astroline Communications Co.) · filed 1998-10-14(31)

The Bankruptcy Code’s definition of “insider” is far more expansive. General partners are -but one subset of those who could be considered “insiders.”

A debtor’s parents are insiders under § 101(31).

Cohen v. McElroy (In Re McElroy) · filed 1999-01-04(31)

McElroys are clearly “insiders” under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31), being Debtor’s parents, as well as being creditors of Debtor.

Section 101(31)(C)(i) includes a partnership debtor’s present partners in the definition of insider.

In Re LaBrum & Doak, LLP · filed 1998-11-13(31)(C)(i)

The present partners are clearly "insiders” by definition. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(C)(i).

Section 101(31)'s list of insiders is nonexclusive; a creditor may qualify as an insider based on its control over the debtor.

Meeks v. Bank of Rison (In Re Armstrong) · filed 1999-02-26(31)

The bank’s assertion that the trustee must prove that the bank falls within one of the defined paragraphs of section 101(31) is incorrect because the statute begins with the non-exclusive term “includes.”

A lender may be treated as an insider if it dominates and controls the debtor; monitoring operations and advising management alone are insufficient.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. Austin Financial Services, Inc. (In Re KDI Holdings, Inc.) · filed 1999-03-08(31)

To establish domination and control by a lender, the allegations must indicate something more than the monitoring of a debtor’s operations and proffering advice to management, even where the lender threatens to withhold future loans should the advice not be taken.

Section 101(31)’s list of insiders is nonexclusive; a transferee’s close relationship with the debtor and dealings that were not at arm’s length can support insider status.

Schreiber v. Stephenson (In Re Emerson) · filed 1999-04-19(31)

The use of the word “includes” in the Bankruptcy Code definition of an insider is not a limiting term.

A debtor’s attorney is not an insider under § 101 without evidence of insider status.

Meeks v. Perroni (In Re Armstrong) · filed 1999-04-26(31)

If the transferee is an insider, 11 U.S.C. § 101, the trustee may look to payments made within a year of the filing of the bankruptcy ease. There is no evidence before the Court that Perroni was an insider of the debtor such that the payment made in 1995 may not be recovered as a preference.

A limited liability company can be an insider of an individual debtor when the debtor’s membership gives him a role analogous to a director, officer, or person in control.

Solomon v. Barman (In Re Barman) · filed 1999-06-18(31)(A)(iv)

BHB is also within the statutory definition of an “insider” of Harold Barman because he is one of its three members, and thus holds a position that is analogous to that of a “director, officer or person in control” of BHB.

Section 101(31)(A)(iv) includes as an insider a corporation of which an individual debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.

In Re Lawrence · filed 1999-07-02(31)(A)(iv)

When examining the plan in the context of this exemption, it is clear that the plan was created by an “insider” as that term is defined in the bankruptcy code. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv) (if the debtor is an individual, the term “insider” includes a corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control).

Section 101(31)(E) treats an affiliate as an insider; affiliate status depends on a substantial voting equity relationship with the debtor.

Leonard v. Mylex Corp. (In Re Northgate Computer Systems, Inc.) · filed 1999-10-15(31)(E)

The Plaintiff has not produced specific, pointed evidence to support affiliate status for the Defendant, and thus could not establish the Defendant as an affiliate-insider of the Debtor under § 101(31)(E).

Section 101’s insider definition permits a governmental unit that controls a debtor to be considered an insider.

White Current Corp. v. Rural Utility Service (In Re Vermont Electric Generation & Transmission Cooperative, Inc.) · filed 1999-10-15(31)(B)

Although § 101 (31)(B) defines "insider” to "include” a "person in control of the debtor,” § 102(3) provides that the word "includes” is not intended to be limiting. The plain language of the Code, therefore, does not necessarily exclude consideration of a governmental unit as an insider of a debtor, if such entity is shown to have been in control of the debtor.

Section 101(31) can include a creditor as an insider when the creditor’s dealings and failure to enforce unpaid debts show a relationship outside ordinary arm’s-length dealing.

Schreiber v. Emerson (In Re Emerson) · filed 1999-12-28(31)

For these additional reasons, the Court remains convinced that William Stephenson is an insider of the Debtors within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

Section 101(31)'s definition of insider is nonexclusive and covers a debtor's counsel who attempts to become the debtor corporation's president, even if he is not elected.

In Re Weaver Potato Chip Co., Inc. · filed 2000-01-12(31)

I conclude that by attempting to become president of the debtor-corporation, Mr. Dixon became an insider as defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). The definitional sections of the Bankruptcy Code regarding insiders do not provide an exclusive list of the capacities in which someone must act in order to technically qualify as an insider.

Section 101(31) classifies a debtor’s family member as an insider.

Parris v. Union Planters Bank of KY N.S. (In Re Vaughn) · filed 2000-02-02(31)

It is also undisputed that Christopher, for whose benefit the transfer was made, is a family member and, thus, classified as an “insider” as that term is defined by 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

A person who uses a corporate debtor’s insider as his agent can be treated as an insider under § 101(31).

Grossman v. Charmoy (In Re Craig Systems Corp.) · filed 2000-02-15(31)(B)

Because Charmoy used an insider as his agent to conduct the business of the General Trust, the Court finds that, as principal, he is bound by the insider status of his agent, Waite.

Section 101(31)(C) treats a general partner’s daughter as an insider of a partnership debtor.

Beal Bank, SSB v. Waters Edge Limited Partnership · filed 2000-04-11(31)(C)

Evelyn Carabetta is considered an insider because she is the plan sponsor’s wife and a general partner’s daughter.

Section 101(31)(B)’s list of insiders of a corporate debtor is not exhaustive.

In Re Prado Verde Ranch, Inc. · filed 2000-06-14(31)(B)

The list of insider relationships is instructive, but not exhaustive. ... While River Valley is not technically an insider of the Debtor because it is a corporation separate and distinct from its shareholders, it is very closely associated with the Debtor by virtue of Deb Olson’s dual position as 50% shareholder and President of River Valley, and as step daughter of the principal of the Debtor. In addition, the Court has already approved Deb Olson’s employment as ranch manager for the Debtor. Her insider status disqualifies her and the corporation of which she is President and 50% shareholder.

For an individual debtor, a corporation the debtor controls qualifies as an insider.

Aaron H. Watman v. · filed 2000-06-30(31)(A)(iv)

Thus, Childrens Dental qualifies as an insider of the debtor for purposes of § 727(a)(7).

For a corporate debtor, a relative of an officer or person in control is an insider.

Moore v. Brewer (In Re HMH Motor Services, Inc.) · filed 2000-09-18(31)(B)(vi)

Linda B. Brewer, Defendant herein, is the wife of Larry C. Brewer and is and was, during the pendency of the bankruptcy case, an “insider” as defined under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(vi).

For a corporate debtor, section 101(31)(B) treats a director, officer, or person in control as an insider.

In Re USA Capital, LLC · filed 2000-08-10(31)(B)

11 U.S.C. § 101(3 l)(b) provides that if the debtor is a corporation the following persons are considered insiders: (1) a "director of the debtor”; (2) an "officer of the debtor”; or (3) a "person in control of the debtor.”

For a corporate debtor, economic leverage over a contract alone does not establish the control required for insider status.

Desmond v. State Bank of Long Island (In Re Computer Engineering Associates, Inc.) · filed 2000-08-21(31)(B)

They may have exerted a substantial degree of economic leverage over the Kelly Air Force Base Contract as a result of CEA’s financial predicament, their unique ability to perform under the Contract due to ownership of the BRAT, and their relationship with the government and SBLI, but they had no control over the Debtor.

Section 101 includes a debtor’s affiliate within the definition of an insider.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Toy King Distributors, Inc. v. Liberty Savings Bank, FSB (In Re Toy King Di · filed 2000-11-09(31)(E)

An affiliate is also included within the definition of insider. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(E). ... TKA held more than 20 percent of the outstanding shares of the debtor. Thus, TKA is also an insider because it is an affiliate of the debtor.

Section 101(31)(A)(i) treats a debtor’s children as insiders because they are relatives of the debtor.

Rinn v. Fraidin (In Re Fraidin) · filed 2001-01-05(31)(A)(i)

As the debtor’s children, the defendants are relatives of the debtor, and are therefore “insiders” as defined by the Bankruptcy Code. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(i). This legal conclusion taints the debtor’s transfers to the defendants as not having-been made as arm’s length transactions.

Section 101(31)(A)(iv) treats a corporation as an insider of an individual debtor when the debtor is an officer of that corporation.

Alside Supply Center v. Kromar (In re Kromar) · filed 2001-02-21(31)(A)(iv)

The second element of § 523(a)(2)(B) is satisfied; the subject writing did involve the financial condition of an insider of the debtor. Under § 101(31), the definition of insider includes, where the debtor is an individual, a corporation in which the debtor is an officer. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv). Here, the Debtor was president of Lifetime, which was the subject of the credit application.

Section 101(31) can include a former spouse as an insider when the relationship is sufficiently close, even though former spouses are not included as relatives.

Hunter v. Dupuis (In Re Dupuis) · filed 2001-03-19(31)

Consequently, persons, such as former spouses, may be subject to the “insider” definition of § 101(31) even though their relationship with the debtor is not specifically included within the list of those capacities automatically subject to the “insider” status of § 547(b)(4)(B).

Section 101(31) treats a debtor’s affiliates and a controlling director of an affiliate as insiders of the debtor.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of High Strength Steel, Inc. Ex Rel. Estate of High Strength Steel, Inc. v. Lo · filed 2001-08-02(31)

Holding and Properties are “insiders” of the Debtor. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(2), (31). Lozinski, as the sole director and controlling shareholder of the Debtor’s affiliate, Spatha, is an insider of the Debtor.

Section 101(31)(B) treats a corporation’s majority shareholder and president as an insider.

In re Carlson · filed 2001-07-25(31)(B)

Although Section 362 does not preclude litigating with a debtor in the debtor’s bankruptcy forum, see In re Roxford Foods, Inc., 12 F.3d 875, 878 (9th Cir.1993); In re Toyota of Yonkers, Inc., 135 B.R. 471, 477 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y.1992), under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B), Carlson is an “insider” of Perfection, and to equate or translate a request to examine the principal of the company in the corporate bankruptcy case with contempt in the principal’s foreign Chapter 7 proceedings is a leap this Court is neither willing nor authorized to take.

Section 101 treats an officer of a corporate debtor as an insider.

In Re Syndicom Corp. · filed 2001-08-23(31)

The instructions for that listing direct that it should not include “persons who come within the definition of ‘insider’ set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 101....” Mr. Ross plainly is such.

Section 101(31) treats a partnership as an insider of a debtor who is its partner.

Jeffrey M. Goldberg & Associates, Ltd. v. Holstein (In Re Holstein) · filed 2001-09-27(31)

HMK is an insider of Debtor under § 101(31) of the Code, because Debtor was a partner in HMK.

A corporation is an insider of an individual debtor when the debtor is its president, sole shareholder, and only director.

Kavanagh v. Leija (In Re Leija) · filed 2001-12-03(31)(A)(iv)

Prior to this bankruptcy, Leija was president, sole shareholder and the only director of Frank Leija Farms, Inc., a California Corporation. As such, FLF was an “insider” of Leija within the definition of 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv).

Section 101(31)’s list of insiders is illustrative, and allegations of a close working relationship with a debtor can support insider status at the pleading stage.

Rieser v. Milford (In Re Chari) · filed 2002-02-04(31)

However, the relationships listed in the statute are not exhaustive, but only illustrative examples of “insider” relationships. ... The Trustee’s complaint includes assertions that Karen Milford was an employee-bookkeeper of the Debtors with knowledge of the inner workings of the business. These factual assertions of a close working relationship between Karen Milford and the Debtors are sufficient to survive the motion to dismiss.

Section 101(31) treats a corporate debtor’s officer or director as an insider.

Daly v. Fusco (In Re All-Type Printing Inc.) · filed 2002-03-12(31)

Further, the Court concludes that at all relevant times Ralph was an “insider” of All-Type — as a shareholder, officer, and director — within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) (1996).

A creditor can qualify as a non-statutory insider when it is as likely to receive preferential treatment as the corporate insiders listed in Section 101(31)(B).

Hirsch v. Tarricone (In Re Tarricone) · filed 2002-03-14(31)(B)

The ultimate test which courts should apply in subjecting the participants in a particular transaction to the “closer scrutiny than those dealing at arm’s length with the debtor” is whether the creditor is as likely to receive preferential treatment as the statutory insiders enumerated by Congress in subsections (i) — (vi) of Section 101(31)(B). Giagni meets this test.

Section 101(31) can cover a person outside its listed insider categories when the person’s relationship with the debtor gives them significant influence or control over the debtor’s financial affairs.

Yoppolo v. Lindecamp (In re Fox) · filed 2002-03-22(31)

Therefore, despite the fact that the Defendant and the Debtor did not conduct their financial transactions at completely arm’s length, the Court holds that the Defendant was not, with respect to his lawsuit against the Debtor, acting as an “insider” as that term is defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

A person who controls a corporate debtor can be an insider even without owning its shares.

Aquino v. Black (In Re Atlanticrancher, Inc.) · filed 2002-06-21(31)(B)(iii)

In view of the rights to pervasively control the Debtor that Black obtained under the Note and Warrant Subscription Agreement, and, in view of the testimony, however, the Court finds that Black became an insider of the Debtor as that term is defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(iii)(“‘insider’ includes — ... person in control of the debtor”).

Section 101(31)(B) lists insiders of a corporate debtor, but its categories are not exhaustive; a shareholder who controls the debtor can qualify as an insider.

Farr v. Phase-I Molecular Toxicology, Inc. (In Re Phase-I Molecular Toxicology, Inc.) · filed 2002-12-19(31)(B)

“Shareholder of the debtor” is not one of the enumerated categories of insiders as defined by the bankruptcy code; however, the list of insider relationships contained in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) is not exhaustive.

Section 101(31) treats the debtor LLC’s former managing member and his law firm as insiders.

In Re Walden Ridge Development, LLC · filed 2003-04-28(31)

Of this sum, the claims of Michael Quigley and his law firm Casta-ño Quigley LLC are insider claims. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

Section 101(31)(A)(iv) includes a corporation of which an individual debtor is a director in the definition of an insider.

Giant Eagle, Inc. v. Monus (In Re Monus) · filed 2003-06-16(31)(A)(iv)

The term “insider” is defined to include a corporation of which the debtor is a director if the debtor is an individual. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv). Defendant was the President and Chief Operating Officer of Phar-Mor; thus, Defendant was an “insider” within the meaning of § 727(a)(7).

Section 101(31)(B)(iii) includes a person in control of a corporate debtor as an insider. A lender’s insider status can be sufficiently pleaded by alleging both a source of power and instances when the lender exercised it.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors v. Credit Suisse First Boston (In Re Exide Technologies, Inc.) · filed 2003-08-21(31)(B)(iii)

Section 101(31) defines the term “insider” to include a number of class of persons. ... Viewing the insider allegations in a light most favorable to the Plaintiffs, the Plaintiffs have alleged sufficiently both a source of power and instances in which the power was exercised by the Lenders.

An executive title alone does not establish that a person is an officer and therefore a corporate insider.

Smith v. Ruby (In Re Public Access Technology.Com, Inc.) · filed 2004-04-06(31)(B)(ii)

This stipulation, without more, is not sufficient to find that Smith was an “officer” within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B).

Section 101(31)(B)(vi) defines a relative of a person controlling a corporate debtor as an insider.

Stancill v. Harford Sands Inc. · filed 2004-06-16(31)(B)(vi)

Additionally, the Stancills are "insiders" under the Code because they are relatives of the person in control of Harford Sands (Larry Stancill). As such, the Stancills' claim is subject to rigorous scrutiny.

Section 101(31)(B) does not make a corporation a per se insider of a corporate debtor solely because an insider owns it.

Miller Avenue Professional & Promotional Services, Inc. v. Brady (In Re Enterprise Acquisition Partners, Inc.) · filed 2004-12-28(31)(B)

We conclude that the bankruptcy court erred in expanding the statutory list of per se insiders of a corporate debtor to include corporations that are solely owned by persons who qualify as per se insiders.

A corporation is an insider of an individual debtor when the debtor is its officer or person in control.

Lewis v. Summers (In Re Summers) · filed 2005-02-16(31)(A)

The Bankruptcy Code defines an “insider” as including, “if the debtor is an individual — [a] corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control ....” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A). The Debtor was an officer and the person in control of Old Summers Marine. Therefore, this subsection relates to the actions of the individual Debtor, James Summers, under § 727(a)(2), (3), (4), or (5), concerning Old Summers Marine.

Insider status under § 101(31) does not itself impose fiduciary duties.

Limor v. Buerger (In Re Del-Met Corp.) · filed 2005-03-04(31)

The Bankruptcy Code does not impose “fiduciary duties” simply because an entity is an insider under § 101(31).

Section 101(31)(B) does not make a corporation’s former attorney an insider solely because of a pre-petition attorney-client relationship; control or closeness beyond arms-length dealing is required.

In Re Premiere Network Services, Inc. · filed 2005-06-22(31)(B)

The existence of a pre-petition attorney-client relationship does not in and of itself elevate the law firm to the level of insider without some other control or closeness to overcome arms length dealing.

Section 101(31)(A) does not make a creditor an insider based on friendship and shared housing alone; whether the relationship amounts to a de facto family relationship depends on the facts.

Gordon v. Vongsamphanh (In Re Phongsavath) · filed 2005-08-05(31)(A)

Because the undisputed facts shown here are also consistent with mere friendship, the Court cannot make inferences to conclude that they establish, as a matter of law, that Defendant was a de facto relative with insider status under § 101(31).

Section 101(31) permits nonstatutory insider status to be determined from the closeness of the parties’ relationship and whether their transactions were at arm’s length.

Stalnaker v. Gratton (In Re Rosen Auto Leasing, Inc.) · filed 2005-08-09(31)

In addition to the statutory definition of “insider,” the court may determine whether a transferee qualifies as a non-statutory insider, for preference purposes, by focusing on two basic factors: (1) the closeness of the relationship between the debtor and the transferee; and (2) whether transactions between the transferee and the debtor were conducted at arm’s length.

Section 101 defines insider status; a complaint must allege facts establishing a creditor’s insider status to treat it as an insider.

Robert Wolfe Associates, P.C. v. Desmond (In re Desmond) · filed 2005-08-12(31)

While most cases addressing equitable subordination under § 510(c) ... involve either technical insiders within the meaning of § 101, including persons in control or fiduciaries of the debtor, equitable subordination of unrelated third-party claims is contemplated by the courts. ... The Court agrees with ASR that the Plaintiff has not pled the facts necessary to establish the “insider” status of ASR.

Section 101(31)(C) can treat a transferee as an insider of a partnership debtor based on their close relationship and transactions that were not at arm’s length.

Miami Police Relief & Pension Fund v. Tabas (In Re Florida Fund of Coral Gables, Ltd.) · filed 2005-08-15(31)(C)

Both the district court and the bankruptcy court correctly found that the Police Fund was an insider of the Florida Fund. First, no one can seriously dispute the closeness of the relationships between Stern, the principal of the Florida Fund, and the Police Fund and its directors. Second, neither the district court nor the bankruptcy court clearly erred in finding that the transactions between the Florida Fund and the Police Fund were not at arm’s length.

A corporation controlled by an individual debtor is an insider even if the debtor is not its director or officer.

In Re Kreisler · filed 2005-10-04(31)(A)(iv)

Pursuant to the definition of “insider,” as set forth in § 101(31) of the Code, Barry and Marsha are individuals, and Garlin is a corporation. However, Barry and Marsha are not directors or officers of Garlin. ... In sum, both Barry and Marsha controlled Garlin. Accordingly, Garlin is an insider of both Barry and Marsha.

Section 101(31)(A) includes a corporation as an insider of an individual debtor when the debtor is its director, officer, or person in control.

Middlesex Savings Bank v. Flaherty (In Re Flaherty) · filed 2005-10-13(31)(A)

The Court also finds that Green Valley was an insider of the Debtor. If a debtor is an individual, an insider includes a “corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.” See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A). As the sole shareholder and president of Green Valley, the Debtor was an insider of Green Valley.

Section 101(31) treats a person who controls a debtor as an insider, but that person's ownership of a separate company does not itself make the company a statutory insider.

Brown v. Kitchenmaster (In Re Hertzler Halstead Hospital) · filed 2005-11-15(31)

While KOT is not legally an insider of the Hospital under § 101(31), it is significant that Kitchenmaster, who is an insider, controlled the debtor when the transfers were made and was the 98% owner and president of KOT.

Section 101(31) treats a corporation controlled by the debtor’s president’s son as an insider of the debtor.

In Re 698 Flushing Realty Corp. · filed 2005-12-07(31)

Steuben Realty Corp. is controlled by Rubin Brach’s son, Joseph Brach, and is an insider of the debtor. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

Section 101(31) treats a debtor’s mother and siblings as insiders.

In Re Reinicke · filed 2006-01-09(31)

Under the Plan, arms-length creditors will be paid in full, their claims severed from those of insiders (which Lemons, Dr. Payne, Mr. Payne and Dockal clearly are; Code § 101(31)).

Section 101(31)(A)(iv) includes a corporation controlled by an individual debtor in the definition of an insider.

Fischer Investment Capital, Inc. v. Cohen (In Re Cohen) · filed 2005-12-02(31)(A)(iv)

An “insider” includes a corporation of which the debtor was a “director, officer, or person in control.” ... Cohen controlled the daily operations of The Joblot-ter, making the corporation his “insider.”

Section 101(31)(A)(iv) does not make a corporation an insider solely because the debtor holds the title of director emeritus; the debtor’s control of the corporation must be assessed.

Rupp v. United Security Bank (In Re Kuntz) · filed 2005-12-14(31)(A)(iv)

The bankruptcy court held as a matter of law that the adjective “emeritus” could be disregarded, and as a “director emeritus,” the Debtor was a “director” for purposes of § 101(31) and § 547(b)(4). We respectfully disagree.

For a corporate debtor, section 101(31)(B) does not classify a corporation as a relative, and its control category requires control of the debtor.

In Re Total Containment, Inc. · filed 2005-12-18(31)(B)

Although the definition of a “person” does include a corporation, 11 U.S.C. § 101(41), none of the non-fiduciary corporate defendants named immediately above could be considered a relative of TCI. Nor is it alleged that these four corporate defendants controlled TCI. Thus, they fall outside the scope of section 101(31)(B).

Section 101(31)’s definition of insider does not include employees of an affiliate merely because of that employment.

In re DemirCo Group (North America), L.L.C. · filed 2006-06-14(31)

Insiders are defined by statute and the definition does not include “employees of affiliates.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). There is no authority or reason to expand the definition of the term “insider” to include some of Group’s former employees because they are now employees of an affiliate.

Section 101(31) can include a former spouse as an insider when the relationship with the debtor is sufficiently close, but former spouses are not automatically insiders.

Dobin v. Hill (In Re Hill) · filed 2006-05-09(31)

The inquiry does not end there however as the definition of insider is preceded by the non-limiting term “includes.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31); 11 U.S.C. § 102(3). Therefore, former spouses may be subject to insider status, even though that status is not automatic.

Section 101(31) gives illustrative categories of insiders; a creditor outside those categories may still be an insider based on the creditor’s relationship with and control over the debtor.

Stalnaker v. Gratton (In Re Rosen Auto Leasing, Inc.) · filed 2006-08-02(31)

Mr. Gratton does not fall within any of the statutorily defined categories of insiders with respect to Mr. Rosen or Rosen Auto. However, the list is illustrative, not exclusive. 11 U.S.C. § 102(3). The court must therefore look beyond the statutory categories to determine if Mr. Gratton is an insider of either the individual or corporate debtor. ... Mr. Gratton never exerted control over Rosen Auto or Mr. Rosen, nor did he have any relationship with either other than a debtor-creditor relationship at all relevant times. The bankruptcy court correctly determined that Mr. Gratton was not an insider of either debtor.

A former officer or director of a corporate debtor is not an insider under § 101(31)(B) solely because of that former role when no control at the time of transfer is shown.

Mann v. GTCR Golder Rauner, L.L.C. · filed 2006-08-28(31)(B)

The Bankruptcy Code does not provide a static definition of “insider.” Specifically, it provides that if a debtor is a corporation, the term “insider” includes directors, officers, persons in control of the debtor, partnerships in which the debtor is the general partner, general partners of the debtor, and their relatives. ... The parties do not dispute that Makings had resigned from his position as CEO and as a director of LeapSource at the time the Agreement was effectuated. The Trustee raises no further arguments or evidence that indicates that Makings was a person “in control of LeapSource,” as defined by the statute, at the time of the transfer. Consequently, Makings was not an “insider” at the time of the transfer.

Section 101(31)(A) does not make a person an insider of an individual debtor merely because the person is the debtor’s friend.

Jensen v. Eck (In Re Steele) · filed 2006-08-28(31)(A)

It should be evident from the foregoing that a mere “friend,” even assuming that the Defendant was a friend, does not fall into any of the categories just recited. This Court is unwilling to expand significantly the definition to include “friend.” It is evident that the Defendant named in this complaint was not an insider within the term described above; thus, the controlling time period is 90 days, not one year.

Under § 101(31)(B), overlapping management alone does not make a creditor an insider of a corporate debtor without evidence that the creditor could control the debtor’s decisions or compel repayment.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Controlled Power Corp. v. Caroman Finance Account, Inc. (In Re Controlled P · filed 2006-09-08(31)(B)

Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Plaintiff, there is no evidence that Caroman had, or exerted, a controlling influence on Debtor or could compel or force repayment of its loans. The record is devoid of any facts which indicate Caroman exercised or exerted control or influence which compelled Debtor to repay the loans. The lack of evidence on this point is fatal, and the court concludes that Defendant was not an insider.

Section 101(31)(A) defines insiders of an individual debtor through an illustrative, nonexhaustive list that includes a corporation the debtor controls.

Garlin Mortgage Corp. v. Kreisler (In Re Kreisler) · filed 2006-10-17(31)(A)

If, as in the instant case, the debtor is an individual, insider is defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A) as including a: ... This definition is intended to be illustrative rather than exhaustive, and the term also encompasses anyone with “a sufficiently close relationship with the debtor that his conduct is made subject to closer scrutiny than those dealing at arms-length with the debtor.” ... There can be no question that Garlin is an insider of both Barry and Marsha.

A creditor is not an insider as a person in control of the debtor merely because it monitors the debtor’s business and attends board meetings; the court looks for day-to-day control.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Radnor Holdings Corp. v. Tennenbaum Capital Partners, LLC (In Re Radnor Hol · filed 2006-11-17(31)(B)(iii)

TCP was not an insider for purposes of equitable subordination, as it was not a “person in control of the debt- or.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(iii).

Section 101(31)’s insider categories are nonexclusive; a former spouse may qualify when the relationship gives that person influence over the debtor.

Salkin v. Chira (In Re Chira) · filed 2006-11-20(31)

Even where the relationship does not fit within the examples given in the Code, a person may hold insider status.

Section 101(31) does not make a franchisor an insider solely because of its franchise relationship with the debtor; the court considers whether it is an affiliate or has a sufficiently close relationship with the debtor.

Congrove v. McDonald's Corp. (In Re Congrove) · filed 2007-01-10(31)

The definition of the Bankruptcy Code is essentially the same. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). The BC and the BAP both held that McDonald’s did not qualify as an “insider” pursuant to these definitions. Specifically, the courts held that McDonald’s was not an “affiliate,” nor did it have a “sufficiently close relationship” with Congrove that would necessitate its conduct being subjected to closer scrutiny than anyone dealing at arm’s length. ... We decline to accept this invitation and, instead, adopt the analysis and conclusion reached by the BAP.

A corporate debtor’s controller, his spouse, and a business he controls can be insiders under § 101(31).

Welt v. Jacobson (In Re Aqua Clear Technologies, Inc.) · filed 2007-01-31(31)(B)

The evidence here clearly demonstrates that Harvey Jacobson controlled the Debt- or and that Harvey Jacobson controls the Defendant Discount Water Services. As such, Harvey and Barbara Jacobson and the Defendant Discount Water are insiders of the Debtor. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

Section 101(31)(B) covers an insider whose close relationship with a corporate debtor calls for closer scrutiny of that person’s conduct.

Repository Technologies, Inc. v. Nelson (In Re Repository Technologies, Inc.) · filed 2007-02-13(31)(B)

Nelson was an “insider” within the meaning of § 101(31)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code and other applicable case law since Nelson had a sufficiently close relationship with Debtor that his conduct is subject to closer scrutiny than those dealing at arm’s length with the Debtor.

Section 101(31)'s definition of insider is not exhaustive; courts may consider the full relationship when deciding whether an entity's conduct warrants closer scrutiny in equitable subordination.

Nisselson v. Softbank Am Corp. (In Re MarketXT Holdings Corp.) · filed 2007-03-02(31)

Moreover, the statutory definition of ‘insider’ is not controlling in any event, and a court must consider all the facts of a given case in determining whether the conduct of an entity should be subject to more rigorous scrutiny for equitable subordination purposes.

Section 101(31) includes a person who exercises considerable control over the debtor within its non-exhaustive definition of an insider.

Energy Smart, Inc. St. Petersburg v. Musselman (In Re Energy Smart, Inc.) · filed 2007-03-22(31)

Lykosov is an insider of the Debtor by virtue of the control he exercised over the Debtor pursuant to 11 U.S.C. Section 101(31).

Section 101(31) treats a debtor’s spouse as an insider.

In Re Sissom · filed 2007-05-11(31)

Because Ms. Sissom is an “insider” pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(31), the transfer was to an insider; therefore, this first badge, of fraud is satisfied.

Section 101(31) includes a debtor’s director’s relative in the definition of an insider.

In Re MacHne Menachem, Inc. · filed 2007-04-19(31)

Heber was an “insider” under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) (“The term ‘insider’ includes [a] relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor.”).

Section 101(31) includes a debtor’s directors and officers as insiders.

In Re Nellson Nutraceutical, Inc. · filed 2007-05-24(31)

As a preliminary matter, section 503(c)(1) only applies to transfers to “insiders,” which includes the directors and officers of the Debtors. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). Only the Level I employees under the 2006 OCP are “insiders” as defined in the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 101(31)(A)(iv) treats a corporation as an insider when the debtor is its director; an honorary director emeritus without governing authority is not a director under this definition.

Rupp v. United Security Bank (In Re Kunz) · filed 2007-06-05(31)(A)(iv)

W e conclude that it is more consistent with this overall understanding of the function of the statutory definition of “insider” – as w ell as true to the actual language – to hold here that Debtor, a “director emeritus,” was not a “director” within the meaning of the definition.

Section 101(31) includes controlling shareholders and corporate directors among a corporate debtor’s insiders.

Miller v. McCown De Leeuw & Co. (In Re the Brown Schools) · filed 2007-06-05(31)

As discussed above in Part III.B.2, the Trustee sufficiently alleges that the MDC entities were controlling shareholders of the Debtors and thus insiders. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B) & (41). Moreover, the individual corporate directors are also insiders.

Section 101(31) permits nonstatutory insider status, but a close relationship alone does not make a creditor an insider.

Carl Zeiss Meditec AG v. Anstine (In Re U.S. Medical, Inc.) · filed 2007-06-12(31)

Some limitation must exist on the status of nonstatutory insider. We think the better rule is that closeness alone does not give rise to insider status.

Section 101(31)’s insider definition can cover an entity outside its listed categories when its relationship with the debtor shows significant influence or control.

Tomsic v. Sales Consultants of Boston, Inc. (In Re Salience Associates, Inc.) · filed 2007-07-06(31)

The terms “ ‘includes’ and ‘including’ are not limiting,” 11 U.S.C. § 102(3); therefore, a party may be an insider despite the fact that it may not fall into any of the per se definitions of an insider under § 101(31).

The United States is not an insider of the debtor under § 101(31).

Wolff v. United States · filed 2007-08-03(31)

The Bankruptcy Court’s final reason for dismissing the Trustee’s preference claim was that the United States was not an “insider” as defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) ... and as required in ... § 547(b)(4)(B). ... The Court is in accord with the Bankruptcy Court in this regard.

Section 101(31)(B)(i) includes a corporate debtor's director among its insiders.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors Ex Rel. Bankruptcy Estate of Felt Manufacturing Co. v. Foss (In Re Felt Manufa · filed 2007-07-27(31)(B)(i)

It is undisputed that Jenifer Foss Smyth is an insider of FMC. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(i). Accordingly, her dealings with FMC are subject to rigorous scrutiny.

Section 101(31) gives nonexclusive examples of insiders; a former spouse may qualify when the relationship gives that person influence over the debtor.

Chira v. Salkin (In Re Chira) · filed 2007-11-16(31)

The Bankruptcy Code does not define the term “insider,” rather, it provides nonexclusive examples. ... The court’s finding that Elizabeth was an insider who used her position to the detriment of the estate, as well as to the detriment of other creditors, is amply supported by the evidence.

A corporate debtor’s officer is an insider even without separate proof that the officer controlled the debtor.

Lassman v. Hollis Meddings Group, Inc. (In re Charles River Press Lithography, Inc.) · filed 2008-01-22(31)(B)(ii)

Title is not everything, but it certainly is evidence that Citizens, Meddings, and the Debtor intended for Meddings to have the status of an officer of the Debtor. An officer is an insider without need to establish separately that he was a person in control. And an officer need not be the president, or have full powers of the president, in order to be an officer.

For an individual debtor, an insider includes a corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.

Buckeye Retirement Co. v. Kakde (In Re Kakde) · filed 2008-02-08(31)(A)(iv)

When the debtor is an individual, the Bankruptcy Code defines an “insider” as, among other things, “a corporation of which the debtor is a director, an officer or person in control.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv). Mr. Kakde was the chief executive officer, a director, and the majority shareholder of USAT. Therefore, USAT is unquestionably an insider of Mr. Kakde.

Section 101(31)’s insider definition is not exhaustive; a person outside its listed categories may be an insider if the relationship with the debtor warrants closer scrutiny than arm’s-length dealings.

Seitter v. Wedow (In Re Tankersley) · filed 2008-02-13(31)

However, the statutory definition is not exhaustive. A defendant who does not have a per se insider relationship with the debtor may still be treated as an insider upon the trustee showing the defendant had a sufficiently close relationship with the debtor so that his conduct is subject to closer scrutiny than those dealing at arm’s length with the debtor.

Section 101(31)(B) identifies a corporate debtor’s directors, officers, and persons in control as insiders; alleging one of those roles sufficiently pleads insider status.

In Re El Comandante Management Co., LLC · filed 2008-03-19(31)(B)

However, allegations that a person is a corporate director, officer, or person in control of the debtor is sufficient to plead that the person is an insider. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(25)(B)(i), (ii), (hi); [5] see also id. at 981-983; In re Cohn Precious Metals, Inc., 1983 Bankr.LEXIS 6623 (Bankr. D.Conn.1983). In his complaint, Plaintiff stressed that Wilson was an insider because he was either Director of the Debtors, officer of the Debtoi's or a person in control of the Debtors. This Court finds that this allegation satisfies the liberal pleading requirement of Rule 8(a).

Section 101(31) does not limit insider status to the people it lists, but an ordinary attorney-client relationship alone does not make an attorney an insider.

Stathopoulos v. Maritime Law Center for Personal Injury (In Re Arana) · filed 2008-03-20(31)

The definition of insider pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) does not specifically include the Defendants, as former attorneys of the Debtor. However, courts have determined that a person other than those specifically enumerated as insiders may qualify as an “insider” with respect to a debtor in bankruptcy. The definition of insider pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) “includes” various individuals and entities; pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 102(3) “includes” is “not limiting.” ... Based on the record in this case, the Court concludes that the Defendants are not insiders for the purposes of avoiding a preferential transfer pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 547(b).

Section 101(31)(A)(i) includes a debtor’s spouse as an insider because a spouse is a relative under § 101(45).

Rainsdon v. Farson (In Re Farson) · filed 2008-04-03(31)(A)(i)

As relevant to the issues here, § 101(31)(A)(i) defines “insider” to include a “relative of the debtor....” ... Thus, Scantlin was an insider as to Farson from and after at least May 12, 2005.

Section 101(31)(B) includes a corporate debtor’s director, officer, or person in control as an insider; alleging one of those roles sufficiently pleads insider status.

Lugo-Mender v. Equus Entertainment Corp. · filed 2008-03-19(31)(B)(i)-(iii)

However, allegations that a person is a corporate director, officer, or person in control of the debtor is sufficient to plead that the person is an insider. ... This Court finds that this allegation satisfies the liberal pleading requirement of Rule 8(a).

Section 101(31)(A)'s list of insiders is illustrative; a close relationship and transactions outside arm’s length can establish insider status.

Grochocinski v. Schlossberg (In Re Eckert) · filed 2008-06-03(31)(A)

The Bankruptcy Code’s statutory definition of “insider” is intended to be illustrative rather than exhaustive. ... In ascertaining insider status, courts look to the closeness of the relationship between the parties and whether the transactions between them were conducted at arm’s length. ... The Court finds that as a result of the close relationship between Schlossberg and the Debtor, Schlossberg was an insider of the Debtor.

Section 101(31) includes a controlling individual and the company she controls as insiders of each other.

Brooke Credit Corp. v. Lobell (In Re Lobell) · filed 2008-06-19(31)(A)(iv), (31)(B)(iii)

Lobell and L-D are insiders of each other. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv) and (B)(iii).

Section 101(31)’s definition of insider is nonexclusive; friendship alone does not make a creditor an insider without control or significant influence over the debtor.

Fee v. Eccles (In Re Eccles) · filed 2008-07-23(31)(A)

The Bankruptcy Code’s definition of “insider” in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B) is illustrative, not exclusive. ... The fact that a creditor and a debtor are friends is insufficient to transform the creditor into an insider; some degree of control or significant influence is necessary, and the Trustee offered absolutely no evidence that the Fees exercised control over, or significantly influenced the behavior of, the Debtors.

Section 101(31)'s list of insiders is not exhaustive; a person may qualify as an insider based on control of the debtor even without a corporate title.

In Re El Comandante Management Co. · filed 2008-08-11(31)

Section 101(31) of the Bankruptcy Code provides a list of persons or entities that qualify as an "insider," however, this list is not exhaustive. ... Lack of a title is not conclusive as to insider/outsider status because said status is a question of control.

Section 101(31)’s list of insiders is not exhaustive; a person may qualify based on control of the debtor even without a formal title.

Lugo-Mender v. Government Communications, Inc. · filed 2008-08-11(31)

Section 101(31) of the Bankruptcy Code provides a list of persons or entities that qualify as an “insider,” however, this list is not exhaustive.

Section 101(31) permits a creditor to be treated as a non-statutory insider only when its dealings with the debtor are not at arm’s length.

Anstine v. Carl Zeiss Meditec AG (In Re U.S. Medical, Inc.) · filed 2008-07-15(31)

We hold here that a creditor may only be a non-statutory insider of a debtor when the creditor’s transaction of business with the debtor is not at arm’s length; a bankruptcy court, however, may find a statutory insider without this requirement.

A corporation wholly owned by an individual debtor is an insider of that debtor.

Guaranty Residential Lending, Inc. v. Homestead Mortgage Co. · filed 2008-09-04(31)(A)(iv)

Because Fitzner was the sole shareholder, BFI was considered an “insider” with respect to Fitzner-as-a-debtor. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv).