John H. Squires

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

Judge Squires 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 Illinois
Position
bankruptcy
Status
Retired 2011
Served
1988–2011
Commissioned
1988-01-01
Education
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, A.B. in political science, cum laude, 1968; University of Illinois College of Law, J.D., 1971
Signed orders read
20

How Judge Squires decides

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

What persuades

Professional services tied to estate administration required disclosure and advance retention approval.

“Full disclosure and prior approval of the Debtor’s retention of bankruptcy professionals is required to protect creditors from unnecessary diminution of the Debt- or’s assets.”

Procedural preferences

A motion to alter or amend had to identify manifest error, new evidence, or a change in controlling law rather than reargue the case.

“Rule 59(e) motions serve a narrow purpose and must clearly establish a manifest error of law or fact, newly discovered evidence”

Cautions

An adverse appellate result did not itself establish that a trustee's position was sanctionable.

“The Court will not sanction the Trustee and the Firm because it agreed with the Trustee’s position, but ultimately was reversed by a higher court.”

Signed rulings

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

In re Gage
· 2008-09-17
Motion to examine fees and for sanctions (the Chapter 13 trustee) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court finds that although Schaller received fees over and above the flat fee arrangement he entered into with the Debtor, which were encompassed within that agreement, Schaller has refunded all of the fees and has corrected the erroneous Rule 2016 statement filed in this case (and many others). The evidence does not support a finding of civil contempt because Schaller did not violate any order of the Court, notwithstanding the errors and omissions in the Rule 2016 statement.”

In re Harrison
· 2008-10-14
Plan confirmation (the debtors) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court concludes that the Modified Plan, with the addition of the above referenced certain special terms, shall be confirmed and the objection of AmeriCredit is overruled.”

Objection to plan confirmation (AmeriCredit Financial Services, Inc.) Denied
Baermann v. Ryan (In re Ryan)
· 2009-07-14
Summary judgment (Jon R. and Lisa M.D. Baermann) Denied

“For the reasons set forth herein, the Court denies the Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment.”

Summary judgment (Maureen E. Ryan) Granted

“Further, the Court grants the Debt- or’s motion.”

In re Eckert
· 2009-07-31
Interim fee application (Freeborn & Peters LLP) Granted in part

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court allows the Applicant interim compensation in the sum of $140,000 and reimbursement of expenses in the amount of $29,371.49.”

Grochocinski v. Spehar Capital, LLC (In re CMGT, Inc.)
· 2009-09-24
Motion for relief from judgment (Spehar Capital, LLC) Denied

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court denies Spehar’s motion for relief from the judgment pursuant to Rule 60(b)(2).”

In re Renaissance Residential of Countryside, LLC
· 2010-02-25
Motion for allowance and payment of administrative expense (the debtor) Denied

“For the reasons set forth herein, the Court denies the Debtor’s motion and sustains the objections filed by Puritan Finance Corporation and Parkway Bank and Trust Company.”

Objection to administrative expense (Puritan Finance Corporation and Parkway Bank and Trust Company) Granted
In re Vanhook
· 2010-03-24
Objection to claim (the debtor) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court sustains the Debtor’s objection to the claim of the Creditor.”

6050 Grant, LLC v. Hanson (In re Hanson)
· 2010-05-10

After trial, the court entered a nondischargeability judgment based on false representations.

In re Grant
· 2010-05-24
Motion to dismiss chapter 13 case (the Chapter 13 trustee) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants the Trustee’s motion and dismisses the case.”

Lehrer v. Flaherty (In re Flaherty)
· 2010-07-08
Motion to quash service (Sean and Carol Flaherty) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the Court grants the Defendants’ motion to quash, denies their motion to dismiss the adversary under either Rule 4(m) or 41(b), and denies their request for the imposition of Bankruptcy Rule 9011 sanctions.”

Motion to dismiss adversary complaint (Sean and Carol Flaherty) Denied
Motion for sanctions (Sean and Carol Flaherty) Denied
Deady v. Hanson (In re Hanson)
· 2010-07-13

After trial, the court entered a mixed nondischargeability judgment across several debts and statutory theories.

In re Roppo
· 2010-09-16
Motion to dismiss chapter 7 case (the United States Trustee) Granted

“For the foregoing reasons, the UST’s motion is granted and the Debtor’s case is dismissed under § 707(b)(3)(B).”

A historical record

Judge Squires 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.