11 U.S.C. § 101

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

Willens v. Bones (In Re Bones) · filed 2008-09-30(31)

“Insider” includes, in the case of an individual debtor, a “corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). As noted in section III-B of this opinion, at all relevant times John Bones owned 75% of the stock of SCSW, was its President, and clearly was the person in control of SCSW. For these reasons, SCSW at all relevant times was an “insider” of the debtor John Bones.

Section 101(31)(B)(iii) requires actual control or its close equivalent for a person or entity to qualify as an insider under the “person in control” category.

Schubert v. Lucent Technologies Inc. (In Re Winstar Communications, Inc.) · filed 2009-02-03(31)(B)(iii)

We agree with Lucent that actual control (or its close equivalent) is necessary for a person or entity to constitute an insider under § 101(31)’s “person in control” language.

Section 101 treats a debtor’s spouse as an insider because a spouse is a relative; the relationship is assessed when the transfer occurs.

Terry v. Paschall (In Re Paschall) · filed 2009-02-20(31)(A)(i)

As Prunty was married to the Debtor at the time of the transfer of the Properties, she was an insider of the Debtor. The term “insider” is defined to include “a relative of the debtor.” See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(i).

Section 101’s inclusive definition of insider covers a person who was an officer or director when the debtor’s bankruptcy case began, for purposes of section 503(c).

In Re Pilgrim's Pride Corp. · filed 2009-02-27(31)(B)

As the definition of insider is inclusive, the court therefore holds that, for purposes of section 503(c), anyone who was an officer or director of a debtor as of commencement of the debtor’s bankruptcy case is an insider.

Section 101(31) defines insider nonexhaustively; a former owner’s advisory work does not make him an insider when he lacks management authority.

Smith v. Porter (In Re Carr & Porter, LLC) · filed 2009-03-17(31)

Because the statutory language merely “includes” types of persons deemed to be insiders, courts have found these categories nonexhaustive. ... Trustee’s factual showing fails to demonstrate a genuine issue regarding Porter’s status as an insider for the purposes of § 547(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 101(31) includes a person in control of a debtor corporation as an insider; the closeness of the relationship and whether transactions were at arm's length inform insider status.

In Re National Century Financial Enterprises, Inc. · filed 2009-03-18(31)

An "insider" of a debtor corporation is defined as including the officers, directors, and general partners of the corporation, as well as a "person in control of the debtor." 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). ... This alleged role transcended a normal, business relationship of a corporation with an outside company. In sum, the complaint portrays Credit Suisse's relationship with the debtor as a close one, whereby the operation of NPF XII's note issuance business depended largely on Credit Suisse.

Section 101(31) includes a person in control of a debtor corporation among its insiders; a close relationship that goes beyond ordinary business dealings can support insider status.

Unencumbered Assets, Trust v. JP Morgan Chase Bank · filed 2009-03-18(31)

An “insider” of a debtor corporation is defined as including the officers, directors, and general partners of the corporation, as well as a “person in control of the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). ... This alleged role transcended a normal, business relationship of a corporation with an outside company.

Section 101(31)(B)(iii) covers a person in control of a corporate debtor; a lender is not treated as such an insider without allegations that it exercised control.

Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors of Fedders North America, Inc. Ex Rel. Debtors' Estates v. Credi · filed 2009-05-21(31)(B)(iii)

The complaint does not allege that the Lenders exercised such control over Fedders that they should be treated as “a person in control of the debtor” under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(iii), nor is there an allegation that the Lenders are otherwise insiders or fiduciaries of Fedders for purposes of equitable subordination.

Section 101(31) gives nonexclusive examples of insiders; a person’s close relationship with and influence over a debtor can also make that person an insider.

Slone v. Lassiter (In Re Grove-Merritt) · filed 2009-06-02(31)

Under bankruptcy law, “insider” is a flexible term. The bankruptcy courts have noted that, rather than defining it, the Code gives non-exclusive examples. Thus, the Code provides that: a) “The term ‘insider’ includes ...” [11 U.S.C. § 101(31)] and b) “‘Includes’ and ‘including’ are not limiting” [11 U.S.C. § 102(3)]. ... Thus, the crux of determining whether a person is an insider under the Code is ferreting out whether that person has “a sufficiently close relationship with the Debtor that his conduct is made subject to closer scrutiny than those dealing at arm’s length with the debtor,” including determining the extent to which the defendant was in a position to control or influence the debtor.

Section 101(31) permits a party with a sufficiently close relationship to an affiliate to qualify as an insider even if it falls outside the listed categories.

Kipperman v. Onex Corp. · filed 2009-08-13(31)

Onex LP does not fit within any of the technical definitions of section 101, however, the court finds that Onex LP had a sufficiently close relationship with Onex to be an insider of an affiliate.

For a corporate debtor, an affiliate is an insider.

201 Forest Street LLC v. LBM Financial LLC (In Re 201 Forest Street LLC) · filed 2009-06-30(31)(E)

The Court finds that LBM is an insider of 219 Forest by virtue of the fact that its 96% owner and manager, Mallegni, acting on behalf of Wolfpen, has the power to veto any of 219 Forest’s prospective financing transactions.

A former owner’s continued employment, financial assistance, and contact with a major client do not establish insider status without sufficient authority over the debtor.

Smith v. Porter · filed 2009-07-15(31)

The Sheeran Affidavit alleges that Porter continued to be employed by the Debt- or, that he assisted in financial matters, including advising the bookkeeper and contacting the bank about financing, and that he continued to interact with the most significant client. These facts are insufficient to demonstrate a genuine issue regarding Porter’s status as an insider.

A preference complaint alleging insider status under Section 101(31) must identify why the defendant qualifies as an insider and plead facts making that relationship plausible.

Angell v. Ber Care, Inc. (In Re Caremerica, Inc.) · filed 2009-07-23(31)

In summary, the court finds that a § 547 preference claim alleging insider status must include the basis for asserting that a defendant qualifies as an insider under § 101(31) and facts showing that the alleged relationship is plausible.

Section 101(31)’s list of insiders is not exclusive, but employment alone does not establish an insider relationship typically reserved for persons with controlling authority.

Angell v. Day (In Re Caremerica, Inc.) · filed 2009-07-27(31)

Although the list of potential insiders in § 101(31) is not exclusive, the court finds that the allegation that Brunson is an employee of the debtor fails to give rise to an insider relationship typically reserved for persons possessing controlling authority.

Section 101(31)(B)(vi) includes a relative of a person in control of a corporate debtor within the definition of an insider.

Angell v. Burrell (In Re Caremerica, Inc.) · filed 2009-07-28(31)(B)(vi)

Under § 101(31), an insider of a corporate debtor includes a “relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(vi). The Amended Complaint alleges that “the Defendant is an insider of the Debtors as she is the wife of one of the principal owners of the Debtors.” The Amended Complaint further alleges that the debtors were subject to the dominion and control of Ronald E. Burrell and Michael R. Elliott. Under the two-pronged test for sufficient pleadings, the court finds first that the allegation that the Defendant is the wife of a principal owner of the debtors is a factual assertion in support of the trustee’s claim for relief. Second, the court finds that the alleged marital relationship between the Defendant and a principal of the debtors creates a reasonable inference that the Defendant is an insider of the debtors.

A person with an officer’s title, including a vice president, is presumptively an insider, but evidence that the person does not participate in the debtor’s management can rebut that presumption.

In Re Foothills Texas, Inc. · filed 2009-07-28(31)(B)(ii)

A person holding the title of an officer, including vice president, is presumptively what he or she appears to be — an officer and, thus, an insider. Nonetheless, this presumption can be rebutted by evidence sufficient to establish that the person does not participate in the management of the debtor.

Section 101(31) treats an individual debtor’s brother as an insider.

Schlant v. Bartolucci (In Re Gawronski) · filed 2009-08-21(31)

Further, she made the transfer to her brother, who qualifies as an insider under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31), so that the applicable preference period is extended to include the entire year prior to the filing of Gawronski’s bankruptcy petition.

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

In Re Smith · filed 2009-09-03(31)

Finally, by definition, the term “insider” includes a relative of the debtor, if the debtor is an individual. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). Thus, David Smith, who is Mr. Smith’s son, should not be counted.

Section 101(31)(A)(i) includes an individual debtor’s brother within the definition of insider.

In Re Mirabile · filed 2009-11-04(31)(A)(i)

Movant is an insider of the Debtor as defined by 11 U.S.C. Section 101(31)(A)(i). The deceased, John L. Mirabile, was the Debtor’s and Movant’s father. Movant is the Debtor’s brother.

The insider definition is nonexclusive: an entity may be an insider of an individual debtor even if the debtor does not direct or control it, but an ordinary investment relationship does not establish insider status.

Farinash v. Tuscany 2 Residential, LLC (In Re Martin) · filed 2009-11-13(31)(A)(iv)

This definition is not exclusive. A corporation may be an insider of an individual debtor who is not a director, officer, or person in control of the corporation. The concept of an insider is aimed at making the avoidable preference period longer for creditors with unusual influence over the debtor and other creditors the debtor might especially want to prefer for personal or business reasons. ... The court concludes that 2Res and Litchfield were not insiders of the debtor.

Section 101(31) can cover a creditor outside its listed categories when the creditor has a sufficiently close relationship with the debtor and their transactions are not at arm’s length.

Dixon v. American Community Bank & Trust (In Re Gluth Bros. Construction, Inc.) · filed 2009-11-25(31)

However, the facts pled by the Plaintiff are not inconsistent with an arms’-length relationship between a creditor and a debtor in distress. It has therefore failed to plead facts sufficient to support its contention that the Defendant was an insider of the Debtor.

Section 101(31)(B) treats an LLC manager with rights comparable to a corporate director’s as an insider, regardless of whether the manager controls the company.

Brandt v. Tabet Divito & Rothstein, LLC (In re Longview Aluminum, L.L.C.) · filed 2009-11-24(31)(B)

The illustration in § 101(31)(B) of corporate “director” applies precisely to an LLC “manager” such as Forte. Control of the entity — a separate illustration of a corporate insider — is not required.

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

In Re Tbr USA, Inc. · filed 2010-01-07(31)(B)

Clearly, prior to January of 2006, John Worstell — being an officer and director of TBR — was an insider, as that term is defined by 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B).

Section 101(31) can treat a former officer as an insider if the person still controlled the debtor at the time of the transfer; a complaint must allege facts supporting that control.

Zucker v. Freeman (In Re Netbank, Inc.) · filed 2010-02-19(31)

Plaintiff must allege facts, which, if proven, would establish that at the time of the Transfer Defendant wielded sufficient control over Debtor such that he was an insider.

Section 101(31)(A)(i) treats a debtor’s mother as an insider.

Floyd v. Bloch (In Re Reznick) · filed 2010-03-25(31)(A)(i)

As Rez- nick’s mother, Bloch is an insider within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)- (A)(i). We subject such claims to strict scrutiny.

Section 101(31)(B)(ii) includes an officer of a corporate debtor, such as its CEO, in the definition of “insider.”

In Re Forum Health · filed 2010-04-07(31)(B)(ii)

Prior to his separation from employment, Mr. Pishkur was the CEO of Debtors. As a consequence, there is no question that Mr. Pishkur falls within the definition of “insider” and, accordingly, the limitations on severance pay in § 503(c)(2) apply to him.

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

TSIC Inc. v. Thalheimer (In Re TSIC, Inc.) · filed 2010-04-28(31)(B)

Thalheimer was both director and CEO of Debtor at the time of the Employment Agreement. Clearly, Thalheimer was at the time a statutory insider pursuant to Sections 101(31) and 548 of the Code.

Section 101’s insider definition includes a person who controls a corporate debtor and can also reach an entity so closely related to the debtor that its transactions are not conducted at arm’s length.

Scattered Corporatio v. Nea · filed 2010-05-19(31)(B)(iii)

And while “insider” includes a “person in control of the debtor,” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(iii), it is not limited to such persons; it includes any entity so closely related to the debtor as to “suggest that any transactions were not conducted at arm’s length.” ... That condition obviously is satisfied here.

Section 101(31) defines insiders through a nonexclusive list, allowing courts to determine nonstatutory insider status case by case.

Wilen v. Pamrapo Savings Bank, S.L.A. (In Re Bayonne Medical Center) · filed 2010-05-26(31)

Because this list is not intended to be exclusive, insider status for nonstatutory types remains an issue for case-by-case determination.

Section 101(31)(A) gives a nonexclusive definition of an individual debtor’s insiders, allowing courts to consider relationships beyond those listed.

Helena Chemical Co. v. Richmond (In Re Richmond) · filed 2010-06-08(31)(A)

The court may look beyond section 101(31) in determining who is an insider in this case.

Section 101(31)(B) treats an LLC member with substantial management authority as an insider without requiring proof of actual control.

LONGVIEW ALUMINUM, LLC v. Brandt · filed 2010-06-28(31)(B)

Thus, in regard to Longview, a LLC that has allocated substantial authority concerning its business decisions to its members, a member such as Forte would fall within the definition of an "insider" under Section 101(31)(B) without regard to whether he is a person in control of the debtor under Section 101(31)(B)(iii).

An LLC managed by the spouse of the debtor corporation’s principal qualified as an insider under § 101(31).

Kapila v. Clark (In Re Trafford Distributing Center, Inc.) · filed 2010-06-30(31)

Advanced Vehicle Systems is an insider of the Debtor pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(1) and Florida Statutes § 726, et seq.

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

Panda Herbal International, Inc. v. Luby (In Re Luby) · filed 2010-09-30(31)(A)(iv)

Where the debtor is an individual, the term “insider” includes a “corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.” ... That makes Viable an insider of the Lubys.

Section 101(31) treats a corporate debtor’s president as an insider whose claimed loans warrant careful scrutiny.

In Re Keystone Surplus Metals, Inc. · filed 2010-12-07(31)

Moreover, since Movant, as the President of Keystone, is an insider as that term is defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31), Movant’s alleged “loans” to the Debtor must be carefully scrutinized.

Section 101(31)(B) includes a corporate debtor’s chairman who owns about 20 percent of its equity within the definition of insider.

In Re Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC · filed 2010-10-21(31)(B)

As noted above, Toll owned approximately 20 percent equity in and was Chairman of PMH when he incurred the fees and expenses for which he is seeking payment in his Claim. Consequently, at the relevant time, Toll was an insider of PMH as that term is defined in Code § 101(31)(b).

Section 101(31)’s insider definition is illustrative, and insider status may be determined case by case.

Vargas Realty Enterprises, Inc. v. CFA W. 111 Street, L.L.C. (In Re Vargas Realty Enterprises, Inc.) · filed 2010-11-02(31)

In addition to the Bankruptcy Code’s definition of 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.” ... Appellee does not fall within any of these definitions of "insider.”

Section 101(31) does not expressly define an insider when the debtor is a limited liability company.

Riley v. Tencara, LLC (In Re Wolverine, Proctor & Schwartz, LLC) · filed 2011-01-21(31)

Section 101(31) does not address the definition of an insider in the case of a limited liability company as it begins with the language “[i]f the debtor is a corporation.”

Section 101(31)'s list of insiders is nonexhaustive; a long business relationship alone does not make a creditor a non-statutory insider.

In Re Greenwood Point, LP · filed 2011-02-04(31)

It is uniformly accepted that the list of “insiders” set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) is not exhaustive, and that the section is “illustrative rather than exhaustive.” ... Accordingly, the Court holds that Gracey is not a non-statutory insider of the Debtor, and the Gracey Claim and the Gracey Purchased Claims may be tabulated for purposes of Class 5B acceptance and cram-down under Section 1129(a)(10).

For an individual debtor, a corporation the debtor controls is an insider.

De Anda v. Kyung S. Song (In Re Kyung S. Song) · filed 2011-04-15(31)(A)

As to the third element, PPT is an insider of Debtor. Bankruptcy Code section 101(31)(A) provides that if the debtor is an individual the term “insider” includes a “corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A). PPT is thus an insider of Debtor, as Debtor is the person in control of PPT.

A creditor is not an insider as a person in control of a corporate debtor merely because its designee holds one seat on the debtor’s board.

In Re QuVIS, Inc. · filed 2011-02-18(31)(B)(iii)

Seacoast was not a statutory insider under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(iii) as a "person in control of the debtor." [52] The uncontroverted facts do not even suggest, far less demonstrate, that Seacoast was "in control" of QuVis. [53] At most, Seacoast had a voice and a single vote in the governance of QuVis affairs by virtue of Moulton's seat on the board of directors and was one of QuVis' many lenders. This falls far short of establishing that Seacoast was in control of QuVis.

A relative of an individual debtor is an insider under Section 101(31)(A)(i).

Riske v. Hesterberg (In Re Priester) · filed 2011-02-28(31)(A)(i)

This qualifies Defendant as an “insider” pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(i), which captures relatives of individual debtors in the statutory definition.

An employee’s “director-level” or corporate secretary title alone does not make the employee a corporate insider under § 101(31)(B); the employee’s authority and role matter.

In Re Borders Group, Inc. · filed 2011-04-27(31)(B)

In this case, the Court is satisfied that although the Critical Employees are referred to as “director-level” employees, none of them, including the Corporate Secretary, are insiders for purposes of section 101(31).

Section 101(31) includes a corporate debtor’s directors, officers, and persons in control among its insiders.

In Re HyLoft, Inc. · filed 2011-05-25(31)

Coletti also is an insider based on his positions as a shareholder and director of the Debtor.

Section 101(31) does not make an individual member an insider based on members’ collective control when that member lacks individual control of the debtor.

In Re Trenton Ridge Investors, LLC · filed 2011-06-23(31)

In addition, none of the other Member Noteholders serve in any capacity that would make them insiders as defined in § 101(31) of the Bankruptcy Code. ... The Court finds that no single Member Noteholder exercises such authority, and that they are not insiders based on any alleged control exercised by them collectively.

Section 101(31)(A)’s list of insiders is not exhaustive; a business associate whose relationship with an individual debtor is sufficiently like a partnership may qualify as an insider.

Braunstein v. Crawford (In Re Crawford) · filed 2011-06-30(31)(A)

Section 101(31)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code defines the term “insider” by supplying a non-exhaustive list of entities that constitute insiders. ... On these facts, their relationship, albeit not a partnership, was sufficiently like that of partners that Kamphaus should be deemed an insider.

Section 101(31) includes a debtor’s relatives among insiders, including a mother or mother-in-law.

Sullivan v. Gergen (In Re Lacina) · filed 2011-06-16(31)

Gergen is an insider transferee because she is Laura’s mother and Corbin’s mother-in-law. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) (insider includes a relative of the debtor).

Section 101(31)(B) can treat an LLC member as a statutory insider when the member’s rights are analogous to those of a corporate director.

In Re Longview Aluminum, L.L.C. · filed 2011-09-02(31)(B)

The district court did not err in concluding that a member of an LLC can be a statutory insider within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B).

Section 101(31)(B) includes a corporation’s officers and relatives of its officers in the definition of an insider.

Picard Ex Rel. Liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities LLC v. Madoff (In Re Bernard L. Madoff Investment · filed 2011-09-22(31)(B)

The Trustee has sufficiently alleged the Defendants are insiders of BLMIS subject to a one-year preference look back period, as all of the Defendants are close relatives of Madoff and were officers or senior managers at BLMIS.

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

Jacobs v. Versa Corp. (In Re Jacobs) · filed 2011-10-21(31)

But the flaw in this argument is that Paramount clearly was an “insider” of the debtor Yury Jacobs, as the term “insider” is used in subsections (A) and (B) of § 523(a)(2). “Insider” includes, in the case of an individual debtor, a “corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

Section 101(31)(B) includes a corporate debtor’s directors, officers, and persons in control of the debtor among its insiders.

Burtch v. Seaport Capital, LLC (In re Direct Response Media, Inc.) · filed 2012-01-12(31)(B)

The Bankruptcy Code defines insiders as directors or officers of the debtor corporation; a person in control of the debtor; a partnership in which the debtor is a general partner; a general partner of the debtor; or a relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the Debtor. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B). Defendants Lastoria, Grae/Sickenius, Eden, Collis, Meyers and Ta-mashunas were directors and officers of the Debtor, and defendants Seaport, OTMH and Innovation were persons in control of the Debtor through the interlocking directorates.

Section 101(31)(B) lists examples of corporate insiders and also covers creditors with sufficient control over a debtor, but regulatory oversight and payment demands alone do not establish insider status.

PW Enterprises, Inc. v. State of North Dakota (In re Racing Services, Inc.) · filed 2012-10-19(31)(B)

The Court must therefore look beyond the statutory categories to determine whether the State was an insider of RSI. ... In short, the State did not wield the control necessary over RSI to render it an insider.

A partnership debtor’s general partner is an insider.

Kane v. Stewart Tilghman Fox & Bianchi, P.A. · filed 2013-01-18(31)(C)

Additionally, Harley Kane was an insider in the Partnership's Chapter 11 Proceeding.

A creditor may be a non-statutory insider when its relationship with the debtor, rather than independent business judgment, motivates its vote.

In re Marble Cliff Crossing Apartments, LLC · filed 2013-01-25(31)

Reviewing the legal standard, courts can disregard votes from an accepting impaired class if the relationship with a debtor becomes the motivating factor, rather than the independent exercise of business judgment. ... On these bases, the Court finds and concludes that Mr. Alexander and TSN do not qualify as non-statutory insiders of the Debtor.

Section 101(31)(B)(vi) treats family members of corporate managers as insiders.

In Re Castleton Plaza, LP · filed 2013-02-14(31)(B)(vi)

Family members of corporate managers are insiders under §101(31)(B)(vi).

Section 101(31)(B)(iii) treats a person in control of a corporate debtor as an insider.

In re GAC Storage El Monte, LLC · filed 2013-03-19(31)(B)(iii)

Given the ownership structure of the Debtor, it is clear that Schwartz is an insider within the meaning of Section 101(31)(B)(iii) as a person in control of the Debtor.

A corporation wholly owned by an insider of a corporate debtor is not automatically an insider; additional facts must establish its insider status.

Tese-Milner v. Edidin & Associates (In re Operations NY LLC) · filed 2013-03-21(31)(B)

A corporation that is wholly-owned by an insider of the debtor is not, per se, also an insider of the debtor.

A corporate lender must itself fit a listed § 101(31) category to qualify as a statutory insider.

Capmark Financial Group Inc. v. Goldman Sachs Credit Partners L.P. · filed 2013-04-09(31)(B)

Here, the AC does not allege that the Goldman Lenders, as distinct from the PIA Funds, fell within any of the statutory-insider categories set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

Section 101(31) includes a corporate debtor’s directors, officers, general partners, and persons in control within the definition of “insider.”

In re AMR Corp. · filed 2013-04-11(31)

As used in Section 503, the term “insider” covers directors, officers, general partners, and persons in control of a corporate debtor. ... There is no dispute that Mr. Horton qualifies as an insider.

Section 101(31)(B) did not classify the retention plan participants as corporate insiders because they lacked authority to dictate company policy.

In re Residential Capital, LLC · filed 2013-04-12(31)(B)

The KERP participants are not insiders under § 101(31)(B) of the Code — no individual eligible that falls under the Estate KERP has the ability to dictate overall company policy, see Hamzehpour Deck at ¶ 17, and the UST does not argue otherwise.

An employee’s executive title or spending authority alone does not make the employee an insider of a corporate debtor.

In re Patriot Coal Corp. · filed 2013-05-16(31)(B)

The Court is satisfied that the appropriate individuals have been excluded from participation in the 2013 CERP in that the remaining participants are not insiders. Mr. Hatfield testified that many individuals are given executive titles but in effect do not have any corresponding executive authority. Mr. Hatfield testified that some 2018 CERP participants have spending authority of up to one million dollars ($1,000,000.00), however this alone is not sufficient for this Court to conclude that those individuals are insiders, particularly given the sheer size of Debtors and their operations.

Section 101(31)(B) does not treat a former corporate officer as a statutory insider after he has severed ties with the debtor and no longer exercises control over it.

Weinman v. Walker (In re Adam Aircraft Industries, Inc.) · filed 2013-06-21(31)(B)

Therefore, the Court finds Walker does not fall within the statutory definition of an “insider.”

Section 101(31) includes an entity as an insider when the debtor is its managing member and that role is analogous to a corporate officer or controlling person.

Sherwin Williams Co. v. Grasso (In re Grasso) · filed 2013-07-03(31)

The Debtor does not dispute that he is the managing member of WSC GP or that he executed the Partnership Agreement on behalf of WSC GP. His position with WSC GP is analogous to that of a director, officer, or person in control of a corporation. Because the Bankruptcy Code instructs Courts to interpret the use of “includes” to be not limiting, 11 U.S.C. § 102(3) (“ ‘includes’ and ‘including’ are not limiting”), this Court finds sufficient similarity between the Debtor’s relationship to WSC GP to an officer’s relationship to a corporation to include the former within the scope of relationships that establish insider status.

Section 101(31)(B)(i)-(ii) treats a corporate debtor’s directors and officers as insiders based on their formal status.

In re Petters Co. · filed 2013-09-30(31)(B)(i)-(ii)

For all but one of the cited categories of statutory insider, the mere possession of the specified formal legal or contractual relationship with a corporate debtor, 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(i)-(ii), is enough to make a defendant an insider. This is a per se rule.

A limited liability company that qualifies as a corporation under § 101(9) can be an affiliate and per se insider when a debtor indirectly controls it.

Redmond v. CJD & Associates, LLC (In re Brooke Corp.) · filed 2014-03-11(31)(E)

Once it is determined that a Kansas LLC fits within the Code’s definition of “corporation,” CJD’s status as an “insider” of both Debtors Brooke Corp and Brooke Capital follows from the definitions of “affiliate” and “insider.” ... Brooke Corp therefore indirectly controlled CJD, making CJD an “affiliate” of Brooke Corp, and therefore an “insider” of Brooke Corp since “insider” is defined by § 101(31)(e) to include an “affiliate.”

A former director ceases to be a statutory insider upon resignation, but may still be an insider if sufficiently connected with the debtor.

In re Neogenix Oncology, Inc. · filed 2014-03-11(31)(B)

Accordingly, Mr. Greene ceased being a statutorily defined insider upon his resignation from the Board in July 2012, and the evidence establishes that he is not sufficiently connected with the Debtor to lead to the conclusion that he was an insider when the Plan was developed or voting occurred.

Section 101(31)(B) identifies insiders of a corporate debtor; a business relationship alone does not establish insider status.

Williams v. Houston Plants & Garden World, Inc. · filed 2014-03-31(31)(B)

Neither Smith nor KC Crushed fits under the statutory categories of insiders of a corporate debtor.

Section 101(31) treats corporate officers and directors as statutory insiders; a person who has left both roles is no longer a statutory insider on that basis.

Weinman v. Walker (In re Adam Aircraft Industries, Inc.) · filed 2014-05-15(31)

A statutory or per se insider is an individual or entity specifically identified in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). ... Based on the foregoing, the bankruptcy court did not commit clear error by finding that Walker made a clean break with AAI on February 1, and was not an officer or director and consequently was not a statutory insider after that date.

Section 101(31)(A) includes a debtor’s relative among insiders.

Martino v. Miszkowicz (In re Miszkowicz) · filed 2014-07-24(31)(A)

For individuals, 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that “the term insider includes ... relative of the debtor or of a general partner of the debtor.” During the Preference Period, Defendant Mark Miszkowicz was the brother of Debtor Steven Miszkowicz. He was an insider as to Steven Miszkowicz within the meaning of § 101(31)(A).

For an individual debtor, a partnership in which the debtor is a general partner is an insider.

Kane v. Stewart Tilghman Fox & Bianchi PA · filed 2014-06-26(31)(A)(ii)

Where, as here, the debtor is an individual, the term “insider” encompasses a “partnership in which the debtor is a general partner.” Id. § 101(31)(A)(ii). Harley Kane was one of two general partners in the Kane Firm; the Kane Firm is his insider.

Section 101 defines an affiliate to include an entity whose voting securities are at least 20 percent owned or controlled by the debtor, and treats an insider of an affiliate as an insider of the debtor.

In re 431 W. Ponce De Leon, LLC · filed 2014-08-11(2)(B), (31)(E)

The Court disagrees because TKP is an insider. RI has a 50% investment in the TKP LLCs. Thus, the TKP LLCs are an affiliate of Debtor, RI, because pursuant to § 101(2)(B), it is a "corporation 20 percent or more of whose outstanding voting securities are directly ... owned, controlled, or held with power to vote by the debtor.” Further, the TKP LLCs are insiders of the Debtor because, pursuant to § 101(31)(E), the “term ‘insider’ includes ... (E) affiliate, or insider of an affiliate as if such affiliate were the debtor.” TKP would be an insider of the TKP LLCs if they were the debtor, and because TKP would be an insider of the TKP LLCs, TKP is also an insider of the Debtor, RI, under § 101(31)(E).

Section 101(31)(E) includes an affiliate of a corporate debtor within the definition of insider.

Howell v. Fulford (In re Southern Home & Ranch Supply, Inc.) · filed 2014-08-11(31)(E)

Combining these two definitions, SRH was an affiliate, and therefore, an insider, of the Debtor because Fulford owned SRH and more than 20% of the stock of the Debtor.

Section 101(31)'s examples of insiders are not an exclusive list.

Sher v. JP Morgan Chase Funding Inc. (In re TMST, Inc.) · filed 2014-09-25(31)

The definition of an insider set forth in Section 101(31) includes “a person in control of the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B)(iii). The definition defines by example and as such is not an exclusive listing of the circumstances under which the insider status is to be applied.

For a corporate debtor, § 101(31)(B)(vi) includes a relative of a person in control as an insider, and § 101(45) defines relatives to include those related within the third degree.

Saracheck v. Crown Heights House of Glatt, Inc. (In re Agriprocessors, Inc.) · filed 2014-10-22(31)(B)(vi)

The evidence shows that Defendant is both a statutory and non-statutory insider. Defendant is a corporation owned by Gutel Tzivin, the niece of Aaron Ru-bashkin, the owner of Debtor and the father of Sholom Rubashkin, Debtor’s former CEO. This is consanguinity within the third degree, as required under § 101(31)(B)(vi) and § 101(45) for insider status.

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

Abramov v. Movshovich (In re Movshovich) · filed 2014-10-23(31)

The term “insider” as defined in section 101 of the Bankruptcy Code includes a “corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control” if the debtor is an individual. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). The Company is a Massachusetts corporation of which Movshovich was an officer at the time of the written representations. Accordingly, the Company qualifies as an “insider.”

Section 101(31) lists statutory insiders, but its definition also permits a person not listed to qualify as an insider.

Think3 Litigation Trust v. Zuccarello (In re Think3, Inc.) · filed 2015-01-04(31)

There can also be “non-statutory insiders” of a debtor. This is because the plain language of § 101(31) indicates that the statutory list of “insiders” is not exclusive, and a court must flexibly apply the definition on a case-by-case basis.

Section 101(31) defines “insider” nonexclusively, so a person can be an insider without a relationship to the debtor.

In re Smith · filed 2015-01-27(31)

The term "insider” is defined in § 101(31). While the definition focuses on the subject’s relationship to the debtor, the definition expressly uses the word "including” — which means that the definition does not limit the focus to the subject’s relationship to the debt- or.

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

Strauss v. Brown (In re Brown) · filed 2015-05-13(31)(A)(i)

It is undisputed that Alice Elliott is Mr. Brown’s sister, and therefore is an “insider” within the meaning of § 727(a)(7) and 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(i).

A spouse is an insider of an individual debtor because a spouse is a relative.

Premier Capital, LLC v. Crawford (In re Crawford) · filed 2015-06-03(31)(A)(i)

Mrs. Crawford, as Crawford’s spouse, is an insider. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(i) (in the Bankruptcy Code, “insider” includes, if the debtor is an individual, a relative of the debtor).

A person in control of a corporate debtor is an insider, but control of the debtor’s separate pension plan does not qualify.

Durango Georgia Paper Co. v. Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. (In re Durango Georgia Paper Co.) · filed 2015-10-05(31)(B)(iii)

The PBGC’s control of the Pension Plan thus was not “control of the debtor,” and the insider standard of misconduct for equitable subordination does not apply.

Section 101(31)(B) identifies a corporate debtor’s officers, directors, and persons in control as insiders; an officer’s statutory insider status ends when that role ends.

Weinman v. Walker · filed 2015-10-15(31)(B)

The Bankruptcy Code defines an “insider” as an officer, director, or a person in control of a debtor. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B) (2012). ... We review for clear error the bankruptcy court’s finding that AAI terminated Walker on February 1, 2007—and thus ended his status as a statutory insider.

Section 101(31)(B) includes a corporate debtor’s directors, officers, general partners, controlling persons, and their relatives as insiders.

In re Tempnology, LLC · filed 2015-12-18(31)(B)

The Bankruptcy Code defines an “insider” as any director, officer, general partner, or person in control of the debtor as well as relatives of any such persons.

An individual debtor’s wife is an insider because a relative includes someone related by affinity.

American Eagle Bank v. Friedman (In re Friedman) · filed 2015-12-29(31)(A)(i), (45)

The Debtor’s wife, therefore) is clearly considered to be an insider under the Bankruptcy Code.

A partnership in which the debtor is a general partner is an insider.

In re Autterson · filed 2016-02-26(31)(A)

As a result, the GL3B Partnership is an “insider” of the Debtor within the meaning of 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A) (an “insider” means a “partnership in which the Debtor is a general partner”).

A corporation may be a debtor’s insider if the debtor controls it, even without a corporate title.

Storey v. Breedlove (In re Breedlove) · filed 2016-01-14(31)(A)

In viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Plaintiff, the Court determines a genuine dispute exists as to whether SES is an insider to the Defendant. The Murdoch Deposition and accompanying errata sheets suggest that the Defendant was a person in control of SES, regardless of the absence of a corporate title. Therefore, a reasonable fact finder could determine that SES is an insider to the Defendant.

Section 101(31) does not make a claim’s assignee a statutory insider solely because the assignor was an insider.

U.S. Bank N.A. Ex Rel. CWCapital Asset Management LLC v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC (In Re Village at Lakeridge, LLC) · filed 2016-02-08(31)

A person does not become a statutory insider solely by acquiring a claim from a statutory insider for two reasons. First, bankruptcy law distinguishes between the status of a claim and that of a claimant. Insider status pertains only to the claimant; it is not a property of a claim.

Section 101(31)(B)’s insider categories are nonexclusive; a creditor outside them may qualify as an insider based on a close relationship with the debtor and evidence that their transactions were not at arm’s length.

Stanziale ex rel. Evergreen Energy, Inc. v. Khan (In re Evergreen Energy, Inc.) · filed 2016-02-11(31)(B)

Because the Bankruptcy Code’s definition of “insider” uses the term “including,” courts have recognized that “insiders” are not limited to creditors who fit within the enumerated categories of § 101(31).

Section 101(31)(B) defines who is an insider of a corporate debtor, including its directors, officers, and controlling persons.

In re REDF Marketing, LLC · filed 2016-03-03(31)(B)

Per 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B), Roselli is an insider which is defined as a “director of the debt- or; officer of the debtor; person in control of the debtor; partnership in which the debtor is a general partner; general partner of the debtor; or relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor.”

An insider of an insider of the debtor is also an insider of the debtor.

In re Bos · filed 2016-03-11(31)

An insider of' an insider of the debtor is an insider of the debtor.

A debtor’s alleged control and management of a company can support statutory insider status under § 101(31)(A)(iv).

Schlossberg v. Abell (In re Abell) · filed 2016-04-01(31)(A)(iv)

As to American Trust, Mr. Abell is alleged to have been in control of it at all relevant times and also to have been its managing member. These allegations support the claim that it is a statutory insider under § 101(31)(A)(iv).

A former officer or director of a corporate debtor who no longer controls it is not an insider under § 101(31)(B).

Madden v. Morelli (In re Energy Conversion Devices, Inc.) · filed 2016-04-15(31)(B)

Defendant clearly was not an “insider” of ECD when the transfer was made on May 26, 2011. After his termination on May 6, 2011, Defendant was no longer an officer, director, or employee of ECD. And after May 6, 2011, Defendant had no control whatsoever over ECD. For these reasons, Defendant clearly was not an “insider” under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) when the May 2011 Transfer was made on May 26, 2011.

Section 101(31)(A)(i) does not list a former spouse as a statutory insider when the spouses were no longer related by affinity at the time of the transfer.

Doeling v. O'Neill (In re O'Neill) · filed 2016-04-19(31)(A)(i)

Defendant and Debtor were not related by affinity at the time of the transfer. Consequently, Defendant does not fall within the list of statutory insiders.

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

Kern v. Taylor (In re Taylor) · filed 2016-06-06(31)(A)(iv)

The circumstances evince an intent on Defendant’s part to deceive the Plaintiffs, and Maple Village is an insider of Defendant.

Section 101(31)(E) includes an insider of a debtor’s affiliate even if the affiliate is ineligible to file bankruptcy.

In re Rexford Properties, LLC · filed 2016-09-07(31)(E)

Nothing in Bankruptcy Code section 101(31)(E) requires that the affiliate of a debtor actually be eligible to file a bankruptcy case.

Section 101(31)’s definition of insider is nonexclusive, but a transaction conducted at less than arm’s length alone does not make a creditor an insider.

Seaver v. Glasser (In re Top Hat 430, Inc.) · filed 2016-09-27(31)

The term “insider” embraces more relationships than those enumerated in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31), and those insiders that fall beyond the literal letter of the law, but are captured within the spirit of the law, are called “non-statutory insiders.” ... The trustee failed to carry his burden of showing that Ms. Glasser was a non-statutory insider. Even though a less-than-arm’s length transaction occurred, Ms. Glasser lacked any meaningful closeness with, or control over, the debtor.

Section 101(31) treats corporate officers closely involved in operating the corporation as insiders.

Ruter v. Schryver (In re Schryer) · filed 2016-09-28(31)

Both are officers and shareholders in Schryver Gun Sales, Inc. As such, both are “insiders” of the business.

Section 101’s insider definition includes a debtor’s relatives, and the court reads “relative” to include the debtor himself.

Trustmark Nat'l Bank v. Tegeler (In re Tegeler) · filed 2018-06-08(31)(A)(i)

This Court expressly applies the term "relative" to include the Debtor himself. Congress permits a broad interpretation of the statutory definitions within § 101 containing the words "includes" and "including," as these words are not limiting.

Section 101(31)(B) lists insiders of a corporate debtor; one email directing an associate does not establish that a lawyer is an insider as a matter of law.

Rund v. Kirkland (In re EPD Inv. Co.) · filed 2018-06-25(31)(B)

But one email in which John Kirkland instructs his associate not to send a demand letter on behalf of EPD is far from sufficient to conclude as a matter of law that John Kirkland is an EPD insider. ... The Bankruptcy Code defines an "insider" if the debtor is a corporation as: (1) the director of the debtor, (2) officer of the debtor, (3) person in control of the debtor, (4) partnership in which the debtor is a general partner, (5) general partner of the debtor, or (6) relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor. 11 U.S.C. §§ 101(31)(B)(i)-(vi). It does not appear that Kirkland was any of these.

Section 101(31)(A)(iv) defines when a corporation is an insider of an individual debtor.

Reid v. Wolf (In re Wolf) · filed 2018-11-19(31)(A)(iv)

Because ZZC was an insider of the Debtor, the longer one year look-back period applies.

Section 101(31)(A)'s list of insiders is nonexclusive; a debtor's long-term committed partner can qualify as an insider.

U.S. Tr. v. Beard (In re Beard) · filed 2018-12-04(31)(A)

Although the Court recognizes that Buch and the debtor were not-and are not-married or otherwise related, the code's definition of an insider is not exclusive and the Court finds that the debtor's long-term committed relationship to Buch qualifies him as an insider in this case.

Section 101(31)(E) treats an insider of a debtor's affiliate as an insider of the debtor.

Moriarty v. Klvac (In re Postrock Energy Corp.) · filed 2019-01-08(31)(E)

Under Section 101(31)(E), an affiliate or insider of an affiliate is considered an insider of the debtor. An affiliate is defined as "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)(A). As PESC is owned by PostRock, and Defendant is an insider of PostRock, the Amended Complaint plausibly states that Defendant is also an insider of PESC as he is an insider of an affiliate of PESC.

A close relationship alone did not make the debtor’s accountants nonstatutory insiders when the complaint did not plausibly allege their control over the debtor.

Feltman v. Kossoff & Kossoff LLP (In re TS Emp't, Inc.) · filed 2019-03-07(31)(B)

The "control" element has been applied to "non-statutory insiders." ... The Court concludes that the allegations in the Complaint do not plausibly allege that Defendants exercised the requisite degree of control over TSE.

A debtor’s relative is an insider, whose claim is subject to heightened scrutiny for fairness and good faith.

Porretto v. Williams · filed 2019-03-11(31)(A)

Because Rosemarie was Sonya’s mother, the bankruptcy court applied heightened scrutiny to Rosemarie’s “insider” claim. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A) (“The term “insider” includes . . . [a] relative of the debtor.”). Rosemarie does not dispute that she is an insider claimant. “[T]he burden is on an insider claimant to show the inherent fairness and good faith of the challenged transaction.” See In re Harford Sands Inc., 372 F.3d 637, 641 (4th Cir. 2004) (internal quotations omitted). We cannot say that the bankruptcy court misapplied heightened scrutiny here.

Section 101 includes a debtor's affiliate and a corporation the debtor controls among the debtor's insiders.

Crocker v. Matthews (In re Matthews) · filed 2019-04-30(31)

Matthews was the owner of more than a 20 percent equity interest in BHB and, in any event, was an officer and person in control of BHB. Accordingly, BHB is an insider of Matthews for purposes of § 523(a)(2).

Section 101(31)(B) includes a corporation’s officers among its insiders; allegations that employees were Senior Vice Presidents who participated in management plausibly establish officer status at the pleading stage.

Jalbert v. Flanagan (In re F-Squared Inv. Mgmt., LLC) · filed 2019-05-07(31)(B)

Drawing all reasonable inferences in favor of the Trustee, as I must on this motion, I conclude that the allegations that each Defendant is a Senior Vice President together with allegations that he participates in management is sufficient to plausibly infer that Defendants Flanagan, Landon and Kearney were officers. It follows that the Trustee has adequately pled insider status.

Section 101(31)(B)'s list of corporate insiders is not exhaustive; people with other titles may also qualify as insiders.

Feltman v. Kossoff & Kossoff LLP (In re TS Emp't, Inc.) · filed 2019-07-10(31)(B)

The statutory definition of insider is neither exclusive nor exhaustive and persons with titles not specifically described by section 101(31)(B) may be considered insiders.

For an individual debtor, an insider includes a relative of the debtor, including the debtor’s wife.

Nelson v. Jackson · filed 2019-07-12(31)(A)(i)

Where, as here, the debtor is an individual, the term “insider” is defined to include, in pertinent part, a “relative of the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A).

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

Jackson v. Nelson · filed 2019-07-12(31)(A)(i)

Where, as here, the debtor is an individual, the term “insider” is defined to include, in pertinent part, a “relative of the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A).

A minority interest in an LLC, without management or governance control, does not establish insider status under § 101(31)(B).

Spradlin v. E. Coast Miner, LLC (In re Licking River Mining, LLC) · filed 2019-07-19(31)(B)

Based on the undisputed facts, Goodwin is not an "insider" of USCCPG or ECM under § 101(31)(B).

Section 101(31)(B) includes a director, officer, or person in control of a debtor in its definition of an insider.

Schmidt v. Rechnitz · filed 2019-08-16(31)(B)

Under the Bankruptcy Code, an insider is defined as a director, officer, or person in control of a debtor. ... Based on these allegations, the Trustee has adequately plead that Platinum was an insider of Black Elk and if these allegations are proven at trial in connection with claims for fraudulent or preferential transfers, may then establish RZH’s liability as a subsequent transferee.

Section 101(31)(B) does not classify an LLC creditor as an insider of a corporate debtor when it does not fit a listed insider category.

Keats v. Cogan · filed 2020-01-24(31)(B)

Sunnyview and TR are limited liability corporations. They are not individuals and do not meet the definition of insiders under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B). If considered to be corporations, none of the entities meet the definition of a “insider”.

Section 101(31)(B)’s definition of an insider of a corporate debtor is non-exhaustive and can include a non-statutory insider.

Tara Retail Group, LLC · filed 2020-01-27(31)(B)

Additionally, courts have developed factors that may render a party a non-statutory insider because the Bankruptcy Code’s definition of “insider” is non-exhaustive.

Section 101’s definitions of insider and relative include a debtor’s spouse as an insider through a relationship by affinity.

Feldman v. Carbone · filed 2020-02-06(31)(A)(i), (45)

The Code defines “insider” to include relatives. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(i). The term “relative” is, in turn, defined to include an “individual related by affinity...” 11 U.S.C. § 101(45). That, of course, would include the Debtor’s spouse and so the Court finds that she is an insider for purposes of this analysis.

Section 101(31) includes a business’s president and owner within the definition of an insider.

Patak v. Jones · filed 2020-04-01(31)

As an owner and “President” of Grace Gems, it is doubtless Mr. Jones is an insider.

Stock ownership alone does not make a creditor an insider of a corporate debtor unless the creditor owns, controls, or can vote more than 20 percent of the debtor’s outstanding common stock.

Melinta Therapeutics, Inc. · filed 2020-07-02(2)(A), (31)(B), (31)(E)

As for Deerfield and MedCo, neither were insiders based on stock ownership because neither owned, controlled or had the power to vote more than 20 percent of Melinta Therapeutics’s outstanding common stock.

Section 101(31)(B)(vi) treats a relative of a person in control of a corporate debtor as an insider, but managing one of the debtor’s farms does not by itself establish control over the debtor.

Ahlgren, Trustee v. Johnson · filed 2020-10-13(31)(B)(vi)

For these reasons, the Court finds and concludes that Zak was not a “person in control” of Debtor under section 101(31)(B)(vi). Accordingly, Johnson is not an insider by virtue of his familial relationship to Zak.

Section 101(31)(B) identifies corporate insiders through specified relationships with the debtor.

Barnes v. 309 Rte 100 Dover LLC · filed 2020-11-06(31)(B)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 101(a)(31), an “insider” for a debtor corporation includes a “(i) director of the debtor; (ii) officer of the debtor; (iii) person in control of the debtor; (iv) partnership in which the debtor is a general partner; (v) general partner of the debtor; or (vi) relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor[.]” 11 U.S.C. § 101(a)(31)(B)(i)-(vi). Appellant does not identify any individuals or entities in the Member Group as having one of these enumerated relationships with the Debtors.

A buyer is not a corporate debtor’s statutory insider under § 101(31)(B) without one of the listed relationships with the debtor.

Hermitage Inn Real Estate Holding Company, LLC and Hermitage Club, LLC · filed 2020-11-09(31)(B)

Under 11 U.S.C. § 101(a)(31), an “insider” for a debtor corporation includes a “(i) director of the debtor; (ii) officer of the debtor; (iii) person in control of the debtor; (iv) partnership in which the debtor is a general partner; (v) general partner of the debtor; or (vi) relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor[.]” 11 U.S.C. § 101(a)(31)(B)(i)-(vi). Appellant does not identify any individuals or entities in the Member Group as having one of these enumerated relationships with the Debtors.

Section 101 treats a limited liability company as a debtor’s insider when the debtor owns a 50% membership interest in it.

Bank Northwest v. Clevenger · filed 2020-12-29(31)

David owns a 50% membership interest in Double C Farms, so Double C Farms is David’s insider.

Section 101(31) defines who qualifies as an insider for preference analysis.

Y2 Yoga Cotswold, LLC v. V. R. King Construction, LLC · filed 2020-12-02(31)

The Plaintiff is not an “insider” pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 101(31), so, to be a preferential transfer under 11 U.S.C. § 547, the Plaintiff’s attachment liens would need to have been perfected within the 90 days prior to the filing of the bankruptcy cases of the Individual Debtor and/or the Corporate Debtors.

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

Young v. Wells-Lucas · filed 2021-03-31(31)

Further, the Amended Complaint contains allegations that the Property was with Debtor’s company, which the Court construes to be Luxury Group and that Debtor owned or controlled it. Thus, any documents showing the revenue history of a property of Luxury Group would be a written document concerning the financial condition of an insider of the Debtor. See 11 U.S.C. § 101(31) (definition of “insider” includes corporation controlled by debtor).

A creditor outside § 101(31)(A)’s listed categories may still be a non-statutory insider; a factual dispute about its control of the debtor precludes summary judgment on insider status.

Schnittjer, Chapter 7 Trustee v. A. Y. McDonald Industries, Inc. · filed 2021-03-30(31)(A)

The parties agree that AY does not satisfy the traditional definition of “insider” under § 101(31). ... Thus, the Court has no alternative but to find that a genuine dispute of material fact exists with regard to whether AY qualifies as an “insider” for purposes of § 547(b).

Section 101(31) does not make a former spouse an insider solely because of the former marriage; the circumstances of the relationship must support that status.

Jevon Richard Piccard · filed 2021-03-24(31)

Debtor places his entire argument on the mere status of Ms. Piccard as an ex-spouse as sufficient for “insider” status. Without further extrinsic evidence or affidavits to support this assertion, Debtor has not met his burden.

Section 101(31) treats a company as an insider when the debtor is its director, officer, or person in control.

Andringa v. Acker · filed 2021-03-31(31)

NBQSL is a limited liability company of which Mr. Acker is a director, officer or person in control; therefore, NBQSL is an “insider” as defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

Section 101(31)(B) includes persons in control of a corporate debtor among its insiders; the court found no basis to treat these lenders as insiders.

In Re: Melinta Therapeutics, Inc. · filed 2021-03-15(31)(B)

Insiders of a debtor corporation include any “(i) director of the debtor; (ii) officer of the debtor; (iii) person in control of the debtor; (iv) partnership in which the debtor is a general partner; (v) general partner of the debtor; or (vi) relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B). ... Again, Appellant’s reliance on “secretive NDAs” is unavailing, and Appellant thus fails to demonstrate clear error in the Bankruptcy Court’s finding that MedCo and the Supporting Lenders were neither statutory nor “non-statutory” insiders.

Section 101(31)(A)(i) includes a debtor’s relative as an insider in an individual bankruptcy case.

Charles K. Breland, Jr. · filed 2021-06-03(31)(A)(i)

The Bankruptcy Code provides that in individual cases, an “insider” includes a “ . . . relative of the debtor . . .” 11 U.S.C. § 101 (31)(A)(i). ... Hence, the proposed sale would benefit an insider of the Debtor.

Section 101(31) gives a nonexhaustive list of insiders, allowing courts to consider whether a party is a non-statutory insider.

Sherman v. OTA Franchise Corporation · filed 2021-05-03(31)

The Bankruptcy Code and TUFTA both contain non-exhaustive lists of per se insiders.

Section 101(31)(A)(i) treats an individual debtor’s brother as an insider because he is a relative of the debtor.

30 Thompson AW Holdings, LLC v. Kovacs · filed 2021-04-21(31)(A)(i)

With respect to Zoltan, while plaintiffs do not explicitly state in the Amended Complaint that he is an insider, it is implicit and there is no question that as defendant’s brother, he is considered an insider.

Section 101(31)(A) defines an individual debtor’s insiders through specified family and business relationships.

Sun Federal Credit Union v. Montague · filed 2021-07-06(31)(A)

The term “insider” is specifically defined with respect to an individual debtor to include 4 categories: (i) relatives within the third degree of consanguinity; (ii) partnership in which debtor is a general partner; (iii) a general partner of the debtor; or (v) a corporation of which the debtor is an officer, director or person in control. 11 U.S.C. § 101(9), (31)(A), (45). ... Nor do any of the counts of the complaint plead any facts showing that any borrower could plausibly be construed as an insider of Montague’s as that term is specifically defined by the Bankruptcy Code.

Section 101(31)(A)(i) treats an individual debtor’s relative as an insider regardless of estrangement.

Newton v. McGhee-Rosenburgh · filed 2021-06-24(31)(A)(i)

Before trial, the Court rejected Defendant’s argument that the Court should not deem her an insider under § 547 because the Bankruptcy Code does not look to the nature of the relationship but defines “insider” as, “if the debtor is an individual[,] [a] relative of the debtor[,]” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A). Defendant unquestionably is a relative of Debtor.

Board-appointed or elected corporate officers are insiders under § 101(31)(B), absent a strong showing that they have no significant management role.

In Re: LSC Communications, Inc. · filed 2021-07-09(31)(B)

While a functional approach, like that performed in Borders, may be appropriate in many cases, the Court agrees with the Trustee that with respect to officers appointed or elected by the Board, such individuals are “officers” under the Bankruptcy Code, at least absent a particularly strong showing that they do not perform a significant role in management.

Section 101(31) can classify a debtor's business as an insider.

Paulsen v. Davis · filed 2021-08-13(31)

MG Honors is an insider of the debtors under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31).

Section 101(31) treats a debtor’s managing members as insiders.

ETS of Washington LLC · filed 2021-09-23(31)

11 U.S.C. § 101(31) defines the term insider of a corporation to include any director, officer, person in control, partnership in which the debtor is a general partner, a general partner of the debtor, or relative of a general partner, director, officer, or person in control of the debtor. The Principals were managing members of the debtor, clearly qualifying them as insiders of the Debtor.

Section 101(31)(B) includes the debtor’s two 50-percent membership owners as insiders.

Clearpoint Chemicals, LLC · filed 2021-09-14(31)(B)

Todd Rader and Harlan Foster are insiders as each of them hold fifty percent membership interest in the Debtor.

Section 101(31)(B)’s corporate insider definition applies to a limited liability company; minority ownership without control does not establish insider status.

Parker School Uniforms, LLC · filed 2021-10-05(31)(B)

11 U.S.C. §101(31)(B) statutorily defines an insider in the corporate context as a director, officer, or person in control of the debtor. ... For these reasons, the Court finds that the Trustee has failed to plead facts to support Parker’s alleged statutory insider status.

Section 101(31)(B) defines a corporate insider to include a director, officer, or person in control of the debtor.

Burtch v. Plexus Fund III, L.P. · filed 2021-10-05(31)(B)

11 U.S.C. §101(31)(B) statutorily defines an insider in the corporate context as a director, officer, or person in control of the debtor. ... The Trustee does not allege that Plexus had any control over Parker’s management. For these reasons, the Court finds that the Trustee has failed to plead facts to support Parker’s alleged statutory insider status.

Section 101(31)(B)'s list of corporate insiders is nonexhaustive; courts may also recognize nonstatutory insiders based on their control of the corporation.

Levin v. Modi · filed 2021-10-15(31)(B)

Courts can deem actors as per se insiders under the statutory definition, see 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B); however, this non-exhaustive list does not preclude courts from finding actors to be “non-statutory insiders” by considering factors to determine that they were the “person in the control” of the corporation.

A debtor’s family members, including her father and sister, qualify as insiders.

Wheatley v. Wood · filed 2021-12-07(31)(A)(i)

Jack and Jennifer are family members of the Debtor and qualify as insiders.

Section 101(31)(B) lists relationships that make a person an insider of a corporate debtor; creditor status alone does not qualify.

LATAM Airlines Group S.A., et al. · filed 2022-01-28(31)(B)

Sajama and the SVP Parties are creditors of the Debtors and hold no stock in the Debtors. They do not have a relationship with the Debtors that falls within the scope of the relevant provisions of section 101(31).

Section 101(31)(B) identifies who qualifies as an insider of a corporate debtor, including its directors, officers, persons in control, general partners, and their relatives.

Henry v. Casey · filed 2022-03-31(31)(B)

For a corporate debtor, however, the Bankruptcy Code would require Henry to be a director, officer, person in control, or general partner of the debtor, or the relative of one of those people. 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(B); ... The record does not present sufficient evidence to assign Henry insider status, and the Court will proceed with the standard for non-insiders.

For a corporate debtor, § 101(31)(B) includes directors, officers, people in control, general partners, and their relatives within the definition of insider.

Farinash v. Henry, Jr. · filed 2022-03-31(31)(B)

For a corporate debtor, however, the Bankruptcy Code would require Henry to be a director, officer, person in control, or general partner of the debtor, or the relative of one of those people.

An entity that owns 90.13% of a debtor qualifies as an insider under § 101’s affiliate and insider definitions.

Infogroup, Inc v. DatabaseUSA.com LLC · filed 2022-04-15(31)(E), (2)

Here, Everest is an “insider” because Everest owns 90.13% of debtor.

Section 101(31)(E) includes an affiliate among a debtor’s insiders, but alleged common ownership must be proved.

Chambers v. Delta Partnership, LLC · filed 2022-07-19(31)(E)

The Trustee has not met its burden and the Court finds Lucas is not a member of Delta and therefore Delta is not an insider under § 101(31)(E).

Section 101(31)(A)’s list of insiders is nonexhaustive; a creditor may be a non-statutory insider based on a close relationship with the debtor and transactions that were not at arm’s length.

Fava v. Swick, Jr. · filed 2022-07-26(31)(A)

Mr. Swick does not fall within any of these categories and is not a statutory insider. ... The Court concludes Mr. Swick is a non-statutory insider of the debtor.

A corporation controlled by an individual debtor is an insider of that debtor under § 101(31)(A)(iv).

In Re: Michelle A. Veale · filed 2022-10-25(31)(A)(iv)

The Bankruptcy Code defines “insider” with respect to an individual debtor to include a “corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(iv). It is undisputed that the Debtor was, at all relevant times, a person in control of Retro.

Section 101(31) treats an LLC as an insider when the debtor is its director, officer, or person in control.

SLK Capital, LLC v. Beach · filed 2023-04-03(31)

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). ... In other words, the Source of Funds and the Balance Sheet in Exhibit 2 reflect the condition of Beach’s Steak & Spirits, LLC, of which there is no dispute Brian Beach is a director, officer or person in control. As such, the LLC meets the Code’s definition of “insider.”

Section 101(31)(A)(i) treats an individual debtor’s father as an insider.

Short v. Short · filed 2023-05-02(31)(A)(i)

Their consanguineal connection also makes Short an insider of the Debtor under 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A)(i).

Section 101(31)(A) includes an individual debtor’s relative and a corporation the debtor controls among statutory insiders.

HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited v. Despins · filed 2023-04-14(31)(A)

Under the Bankruptcy Code, insiders of an individual debtor include a “(i) relative of the debtor or of a general partner of the debtor; (ii) partnership in which the debtor is a general partner; (iii) general partner of the debtor; or (iv) corporation of which the debtor is a director, officer, or person in control.” 11 U.S.C. § 101(31)(A). The Trustee clearly alleges that Ms. Guo is the Individual Debtor’s daughter and that the Individual Debtor controls HK USA. Therefore, the Trustee clearly alleges that HK Parties are both statutory insiders.

Section 101(31)(A) treats an individual debtor’s daughter as an insider regardless of estrangement.

Cohen, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Trahan · filed 2023-07-06(31)(A)

The statutory language alone is sufficient to establish that a relative is an insider regardless of any circumstances effecting the relationship.

Section 101(31)(A) does not treat an individual debtor as an insider of himself.

U.S. Trustee (ust) v. Arnold · filed 2023-07-13(31)(A)

The Debtor cannot be an insider of himself.

Section 101(31)(B)(iii) treats a person who controls a corporate debtor as an insider.

Mitchell v. Kruckenberg · filed 2023-08-16(31)(B)(iii)

A trier of fact must infer from Tyler’s title—owner and manager—that he was a person in control of debtors and was thus an insider, so the preference payments recoverable from him include those made during the entire prepetition year.