Arthur S. Weissbrodt

How Judge Weissbrodt rules, drawn from 18 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of California
Position
bankruptcy
Status
Retired 2016
Served
1989–2016
Appointed by
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Commissioned
1989-01-01
Signed orders read
18

How Judge Weissbrodt decides

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

What persuades

Fee requests should use detailed, unredacted entries that let the court separate work by task and evaluate necessity and duplication.

“The attorney applying for fees bears the burden of proving the reasonableness of those fees, which can only be done by presentation of carefully detailed applications and supporting documentation.”

Procedural preferences

When a sale would eliminate a property interest, he expects unambiguous notice directed to that interest holder rather than general knowledge of the bankruptcy.

“Holders of liens that may be adversely affected are entitled to unambiguous notice and an adequate opportunity to reflect and to respond.”

Cautions

A Chapter 13 debtor proposing unequal treatment among unsecured creditors must supply evidence showing that the discrimination is fair under the governing factors.

“It is the Debtor’s burden to prove that the proposed classification does not unfairly discriminate against other unsecured creditors.”

Signed rulings

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

General Electric Capital Corp. v. Bui (In re Bui)
· 1995-10-02
Application for default judgment (creditor plaintiff) Denied

“GECC’s application for a default judgment determining the debts represented by the Levitz and Macy’s accounts to be non-dis-chargeable is denied without prejudice”

In re Pitt
· 1999-10-14
Objection to confirmation (County of Santa Clara in Pitt) Granted

“County’s objections to confirmation of the Chapter 13 plans in each of these cases are sustained.”

Objection to confirmation (County of Santa Clara in De Jesus) Granted
Objection to confirmation (County of Santa Clara in Carucci) Granted
In re Henson
· 2002-01-07
Motion to dismiss bankruptcy case (creditor) Denied

“Creditor’s motion must therefore be denied.”

In re Silicon Valley Telecom Exchange, LLC
· 2002-06-13
Motion for relief from stay (subtenant creditor) Granted in part

“EBS is entitled to stay relief to set off its claim”

In re Henson
· 2003-02-07
Motion to dismiss bankruptcy case (creditor) Denied

“Creditor’s motion to dismiss this Chapter 13 case with prejudice is denied”

Objection to confirmation (creditor) Moot / procedural

“Creditor’s objection to confirmation of Debtor’s proposed Chapter 13 Plan is therefore moot.”

In re Henson
· 2003-10-23
Motion to dismiss bankruptcy case (creditor) Denied

“Creditor’s motion to dismiss the Chapter 7 case is denied, without prejudice.”

In re Beck
· 2004-03-29
Motion to dismiss bankruptcy case (business-broker creditor) Denied

“BTI’s motion (in which Lietzke joins) to dismiss this case, and BTI’s objection to confirmation of the Debtor’s proposed Plan must both be, and hereby are, denied.”

Objection to confirmation (business-broker creditor) Denied

“BTI’s objection to confirmation of the Debtor’s proposed Plan must both be, and hereby are, denied.”

In re Enriquez
· 2004-09-22
Objection to confirmation (secured bank) Granted in part

“the Bank’s objection to confirmation of the Debtor’s Plan is sustained to the extent that. it alleges ineligibility, and is moot with respect to all other grounds raised.”

In re Mason
· 2004-10-14
Objection to plan modification (vehicle lender) Denied

“the Creditor’s objection to the Debtor’s Application to modify the Plan is overruled”

Motion to modify plan (debtor) Granted

“the Application is approved.”

In re Bricksin
· 2006-07-26
Motion to dismiss bankruptcy case (United States Trustee) Denied

“the Trustee’s Motion to Dismiss is denied.”

Doolittle v. County of Santa Cruz (In re Metzger)
· 2006-08-02
Motion for summary adjudication (county) Granted

“the Order is void as to the County’s interest in the Property.”

Motions to remand (county) Granted

“The County shall also submit a separate order providing for the remand of this matter to state court”

In re Hoffman
· 2006-10-08
Motion for attorneys fees (secured creditor) Denied

“the Court disallows all fees requested by Creditor without prejudice”

A historical record

Judge Weissbrodt 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.