Samuel L. Bufford

How Judge Bufford rules, drawn from 20 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Bufford no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.

Court
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California
Position
bankruptcy
Status
No longer serving
Commissioned
1985-11-25
Signed orders read
20

How Judge Bufford decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Procedural preferences

A Chapter 13 plan built primarily on replacing old debt with new borrowing was not treated as a viable fresh-start plan.

“The substitution of new debt for more than 70% of the existing, old debt is simply not within the contemplation of chapter 13.”

Cautions

An initial consultation can create a disqualifying conflict when likely confidential disclosures concern a substantially related later representation.

“This court holds that an attorney must be disqualified on conflict of interest grounds if the attorney meets with a client under circumstances in which confidential information would likely be disclosed, and the attorney subsequently represents an adverse client in a substantially related matter, even if the former client never employed the attorney.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

Aura Systems, Inc. v. Barovich (In re Aura Systems, Inc.)
· 2006-08-18
Summary judgment (Aura Systems, Inc.) Granted

“Summary judgment is granted to Aura.”

Nevens v. Kye Soon Chung (In re Kye Soon Chung)
· 2005-11-22
Summary judgment (Lawrence C. Nevens) Granted in part

“The court finds that Nevens is entitled to judgment that $50,000 of the state court judgment, plus interest accruing thereon at ten percent from the date of judgment to the date of the bankruptcy filing, is nondischargeable.”

Summary judgment (Kye Soon Chung and Hong Ja Chung) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, the court concludes that the $240,000 portion of the judgment plus the costs and attorneys’ fees are discharged.”

In re Paasch
· 2005-10-06
Plan confirmation (Christopher S. Paasch) Denied

“Accordingly, the court denies confirmation of the plan.”

Atighi v. Green (In re Atighi)
· 2004-11-05
Foreclosure challenge (Andy Atighi) Denied

“In consequence, the court finds that the Greens are entitled to judgment after trial in this adversary proceeding.”

In re Lucero
· 2009-07-16
Motion to dismiss bankruptcy case (the Chapter 7 trustee) Granted in part

“The court finds that dismissing only Ms. Aguirre from this case is an appropriate remedy in light of policies favoring debtors drawn from relevant case law and the court’s statutory authority and its discretion pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 105(a).”

Walsh v. Century City Doctors Hospital, LLC (In re Century City Doctors Hospital, LLC)
· 2009-08-17
Motion to dismiss warn act claim (the Chapter 7 trustee) Granted

“The motion to dismiss the WARN Act claim against the trustee is granted without leave to amend.”

Robert v. Bisno (In re Bisno)
· 2010-05-28
Motions to remand (the court sua sponte) Granted

“Given these circumstances and the court’s concern for judicial economy, there is compelling evidence to remand this adversary proceeding to the Alameda County Superior Court so that the state court proceeding may be completed.”

Eyecare of Southern California v. Urrea (In re Eyecare of Southern California)
· 2001-01-25
Motions to remand (Paul T. Urrea and related defendants) Denied

“The removal of this adversary proceeding to this court was proper, even though the court had not yet entered an order of relief in this involuntary bankruptcy case.”

In re Marshall
· 2003-03-27
Motion for recusal (Pierce Marshall) Denied

“The court concludes that grounds for recusal or reassignment of this case have not been shown. The motion is denied in all respects.”

Motion for reassignment (Pierce Marshall) Denied
Lu v. Liu (In re Liu)
· 2002-09-05
Motion to rely on requests for admission (Robert Lu) Denied

“The court notes that, after denying the motion to rely on the requests for admission, plaintiff proceeded to prove its case on the merits with other evidence”

Nondischargeability claim (Robert Lu) Granted

“plaintiff showed that he is entitled to judgment against the defendant in the amount requested, and a determination that the debt is not dischargeable.”

In re Mama's Original Foods, Inc.
· 1999-05-20
Motion to sell estate property (Chapter 7 trustee David L. Ray) Granted

“Because no other prospective bidders appeared at the hearing, the court has approved the sale.”

Value Property Trust v. Zim Co. (In re Mortgage & Realty Trust)
· 1997-09-16
Motion to compel discovery (Zim Company) Denied

“The communication here at issue was made in the furtherance of this common interest, and has not been otherwise disclosed. It thus is entitled to protection under the common interest extension of the attorney-client privilege.”

A historical record

Judge Bufford no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.