Robert E. Brizendine

How Judge Brizendine rules, drawn from 22 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Brizendine 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 Georgia
Position
bankruptcy
Status
Retired 2014
Served
1993–2014
Commissioned
1993-01-01
Signed orders read
22

How Judge Brizendine decides

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

What persuades

Claims turning on subjective intent may require live testimony and demeanor evidence before the court will resolve them.

“the Court must hear Debtor’s testimony and observe her demeanor under examination before making any findings concerning allegations concerning her intent”

A wholly unsecured junior lien may be evaluated by collateral value rather than by whether the property is a residence or rental.

“it is neither the use or character of the underlying real property (i.e. as a home or as a rental property) nor the nature of the lien (i.e. consensual or non-consensual) that is determinative in the lien-stripping inquiry.”

Procedural preferences

A creditor relying on fraud must present evidence beyond the debtor's inability or failure to repay.

“the failure to repay a loan does not in and of itself establish fraud under Section 523(a)(2)(A).”

A unified state-court damages award may be insufficient for summary judgment when the bankruptcy court cannot allocate it among distinct legal theories.

“in light of the unified nature of the state court award and this Court’s inability to allocate it among the various claims for relief sought by Plaintiffs in that litigation”

Cautions

An applicant must preserve statutory claims diligently; procedural difficulty alone does not establish equitable tolling.

“he has not shown an issue on grounds of having exercised due diligence in preserving the claim.”

Signed rulings

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

FIA Card Services NA v. Lee (In re Lee)
· 2011-01-31
Summary judgment (the plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED that the motion of Plaintiff for summary judgment be, and the same hereby is, denied.”

Campbell v. Marshall & Ilsley Bank (In re Campbell)
· 2013-05-23
Motion to determine secured status (the debtor-movants) Granted

“ORDERED that the motion of Debtor-Movants Kevin Patrick Campbell and Angelica Joanna Campbell to determine secured status of claim of Respondent Marshall & Ilsley Bank a/k/a BMO Harris Bank will be granted”

Gelfand v. Gibson (In re Gibson)
· 2010-08-30
Summary judgment (the defendant-debtors) Denied

“ORDERED that the motion of Defendant-Debtors for entry of summary judgment on Plaintiffs’ complaint be, and the same hereby is, denied.”

Morgan v. United States (In re Morgan)
· 2000-07-17
Summary judgment (the United States) Denied

“ORDERED that the motion of the United States of America for summary judgment be, and hereby is, denied”

Morgan v. United States (In re Morgan)
· 2000-11-01
Objection to proof of claim (the debtors) Granted in part

“ORDERED that the Debtors’ objection to the claim of the United States of America, by and through the Internal Revenue Service, be, and hereby is, granted in part and denied in part”

Rogers v. M & I Bank FSB (In re Morgan)
· 2010-04-09
Summary judgment (M & I Bank FSB) Denied

“ORDERED that the motion of Defendant M & I Bank FSB for entry of summary judgment in its favor on Plaintiff Chapter 7 Trustee’s complaint be, and the same hereby is, denied;”

Summary judgment (the Chapter 7 trustee) Granted

“FURTHER ORDERED that the cross-motion of Plaintiff Chapter 7 Trustee for entry of summary judgment on the complaint be, and the same hereby is, granted.”

In re Reed
· 2006-02-28

The court allowed the debtors to proceed by motion but reserved whether protection would be imposed for a later hearing.

Parham v. Harris-Onaxis (In re Harris-Onaxis)
· 2011-12-08
Motions to dismiss (the defendant-debtors) Denied

“ORDERED that Defendant-Debtors’ renewed motion to dismiss Plaintiffs’ complaint be, and the same hereby is, denied.”

Summary judgment (the plaintiffs) Granted

“FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment on their complaint as amended in this adversary proceeding be, and they same hereby is, granted”

Nasuti v. Dolin (In re McDonald)
· 2013-09-04
Summary judgment (the defendants) Granted in part

“ORDERED that Defendants named above are entitled to summary judgment against Plaintiff-Chapter 7 Trustee with respect to their assertion of a defense under the applicable statute of limitations, and therefore, Defendants’ motion to dismiss as converted to a motion for summary judgment be, and the same hereby is, granted on the several counts set forth in the complaint.”

AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc. v. Swafford (In re Swafford)
· 2002-11-08

The court deferred the confirmation objection for evidence about the appropriate interest rate.

Dunn v. Whyte (In re Whyte)
· 2013-01-29
Summary judgment (the defendant-debtor) Granted

“ORDERED that the motion of Defendant-Debtor Pauline Elizabeth Whyte for summary judgment be, and the same hereby is, granted;”

Bracciodieta v. Raccuglia (In re Raccuglia)
· 2011-10-07
Summary judgment (the plaintiffs) Denied

“ORDERED that the motion of Plaintiffs for summary judgment herein be, and the same hereby is, denied.”

A historical record

Judge Brizendine 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.