Alexander L. Paskay

How Judge Paskay rules, drawn from 23 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

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

Court
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Florida
Position
bankruptcy
Status
Deceased
Served
1963–2011
Commissioned
1963
Education
University of Budapest, law degree, 1944; University of Miami School of Law, J.D., 1958
Signed orders read
23

How Judge Paskay decides

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

Procedural preferences

A lawyer's misunderstanding of the bankruptcy appeal deadline does not establish excusable neglect.

“Misunderstanding of the rules governing appeals in Bankruptcy does not constitute ‘excusable neglect.’”

Competing summary-judgment motions are denied when material facts remain disputed.

“there are genuine issues of material fact which preclude the granting of summary judgment as a matter of law.”

Cautions

A state-law proceeding already prepared for trial may be remanded when bankruptcy jurisdiction is only related and the state forum can resolve it promptly.

“the State Law Action was ready for trial before it was removed. The State Court judge is intimately familiar with claims and issues involved in the case.”

Signed rulings

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

Jensen v. Bank of America Mortgage Capital Corp. (In re General Mortgage Corporation of America, Inc.)
· 2008-11-17
Summary judgment (chapter 7 trustee Diane L. Jensen) Granted

“The Court has considered the record and finds that this Court has entered Memorandum Opinion Granting Plaintiffs Motion for Summary Judgment on Complaint to Recover Avoided Transfer Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 550.”

Capitol Indemnity Corp. v. Heidkamp (In re Steve A. Clapper & Associates)
· 2006-06-19
Motion for reconsideration and extension of time (chapter 7 trustee) Denied

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the Order Denying Trustee’s Motion for Reconsideration and/or Review of this Court’s Order entered on July 30, 2004, Dismissing Appeal for Untimeliness and Motion for Extension to File Notice of Appeal (Doc. No. 48) be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.”

21st Century Satellite Communications, Inc. v. Retirement Accounts, Inc. (In re 21st Century Satellite Communications, Inc.)
· 2005-03-22
Motions to dismiss (Tower Square Securities, Inc.) Denied

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 230) be, and is hereby, denied without prejudice.”

21st Century Satellite Communications, Inc. v. Byrch (In re 21st Century Satellite Communications, Inc.)
· 2005-03-22
Motions to dismiss (Woodbury Financial Services, Inc.) Denied

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 232) be, and is hereby, denied without prejudice.”

Jensen v. Cardillo, Keith & Bonaquist, P.A. (In re Leli)
· 2010-01-06
Summary judgment (Christopher Marsala and affiliated defendants) Denied

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Motion for Final Summary Judgment as to Counts IX, X and XI of Plaintiffs Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 169) be, and the same is hereby, denied.”

Summary judgment (chapter 7 trustee Diane L. Jensen) Denied

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 173) be, and the same is hereby, denied.”

Talisman Marina, Inc. v. Heartstone Developers, LLC (In re Talisman Marina, Inc.)
· 2008-02-15
Motion to abstain or remand (Heartstone Developers, LLC) Granted

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Heartstone Developers, LLC’s Motion to Remand and/or for Mandatory Abstention (Doc. No. 26) be, and the same is hereby, granted.”

21st Century Satellite Communications, Inc. v. Byrch (In re 21st Century Satellite Communications, Inc.)
· 2005-03-31
Motion for rule 9011 sanctions and dismissal (Woodbury Financial Services, Inc.) Granted in part

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Woodbury Financial Services Inc.’s Motion for Rule 9011 Sanctions be, and the same is hereby, denied without prejudice. It is further ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that 21st Century Inc.’s Amended Complaint be, and the same is hereby, dismissed and 21st Century shall have thirty (30) days from the date of this Order to amend its Complaint.”

Harrison v. Nascarella (In re Harrison)
· 2006-06-20
Summary judgment (Peter M. Nascarella, Kelly L. Nascarella, and A & J Automotive Group, Inc.) Denied

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Counter Plaintiffs’ Amended Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (Doc. No. 68) be, and the same, is hereby denied.”

Hydro Partners, LLC v. Gilberti (In re Gilberti)
· 2006-01-27
Summary judgment (Hydro Partners, LLC) Granted in part

“Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Hydro Partners, LLC be, and the same is hereby, granted in part and denied in part”

Summary judgment (Celso R. Gilberti) Granted

“The Debtor’s cross-Motion for Summary Judgment as to Count I of the Complaint is granted.”

21st Century Satellite Communications, Inc. v. Retirement Accounts, Inc. (In re 21st Century Satellite Communications, Inc.)
· 2005-03-22
Motions to dismiss (FSC Securities Corporation and SunAmerica Securities, Inc.) Denied

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 244) be, and is hereby, denied without prejudice.”

Jet 1 Center, Inc. v. City of Naples Airport Authority (In re Jet 1 Center, Inc.)
· 2006-02-14
Motion for attorneys fees (City of Naples Airport Authority) Granted

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Motion by City of Naples Airport Authority for the Assessment of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (Doc. No. 206), filed by the City of Naples Airport Authority be, and the same is hereby, granted.”

Motion for attorneys fees (Jet 1 Center, Inc.) Denied

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Motion to Determine Entitlement to Attorneys’ Fees and Costs *171(Doc. No. 219), filed by the Debtor be, and the same is hereby, denied.”

In re Bean
· 2000-08-23
Objection to claim (debtor Robert Bean) Denied

“ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the Objection to Claim No. 35 be, and the same is hereby overruled and Claim No. 35 is hereby allowed.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

Five sampled terminated matters contained no docket entries, so no caseload mix or case-duration summary is available.

A historical record

Judge Paskay 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.