Elizabeth W. Magner

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

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

Court
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
Position
bankruptcy
Status
Retired 2019
Served
2005–2019
Commissioned
2005
Signed orders read
20

How Judge Magner decides

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

What persuades

A creditor's later extension of new value reduced, but did not eliminate, preference exposure.

“The Trustee is entitled to recover the remaining $144,406.25 in preferential payments made by Sea Bridge, plus legal interest from August 18, 2007.”

Surrender could fully satisfy a claim secured by a vehicle purchased within 910 days of bankruptcy.

“For the above reasons, this Court holds that the Debtor may surrender collateral subject to the hanging paragraph in full satisfaction of Toyota’s claim.”

Procedural preferences

At summary judgment, factual questions about market risk and industry norms required a trial rather than resolution on the papers.

“As a result, summary judgment is denied and this issue is referred to trial on the merits.”

Requests to convert chapters receive close scrutiny when the record indicates concealment, delay, and prejudice to creditors.

“In summary, Debtor did not meet the burden of showing that the Motion to Convert to Chapter 13 was filed in good faith.”

Cautions

Material accounting and claim errors can support compensatory relief, sanctions, and corrective auditing requirements.

“The Court will assess damages in the amount of $10,000.00, plus $12,350.00 in legal fees, for the abusive imposition of unwarranted fees and charges (late fees and inspection costs); the illegal imposition of fees disguised as costs (BPO charges); the negligent imposition of fees and costs not due (legal charges and deposits reimbursed); the improper calculation of escrow payments; the misapplication of payments contrary to the terms of the Note and Mortgage; the failure to notify Debtor of fees and charges on her account; and the improper payment of unnoticed fees and charges during pending bankruptcies.”

Published rulings treated repeated undisclosed postpetition charges as requiring prospective accounting procedures rather than additional punitive damages.

“Any additional award of punitive damages is inconsistent with this position.”

Signed rulings

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

Lightfoot v. MXEnergy Electric, Inc. (In Re MBS Management Services, Inc.)
· 2010-05-07
Summary judgment (MXEnergy Electric, Inc.) Denied

“As a result, summary judgment is denied and this issue is referred to trial on the merits.”

Lightfoot v. Amelia Maritime Services, Inc.
· 2008-11-24
Preference avoidance claim (Chapter 7 Trustee) Granted in part

“The Trustee is entitled to recover the remaining $144,406.25 in preferential payments made by Sea Bridge, plus legal interest from August 18, 2007.”

Subsequent new value defense (Praxis Energy Agents LLC) Granted in part

“Since new value is calculated at the time Sea Bridge received the bunker, Praxis is entitled to retain the value of the bunker, or $50,593.75.”

In Re Devilliers
· 2007-01-09
Chapter 13 plan confirmation (Chauvin, Devilliers, Fretwell, and Piazza debtors) Denied

“Under the analysis set forth above, confirmation is denied for the plans proposed by the Chauvins, Devilliers, Fretwells, and Piazza.”

Objection to vehicle ownership deduction (Chapter 13 Trustee) Granted

“Specifically, because the Chauvins, Fretwells and Piazza claimed, in the calculation of projected disposable income, IRS standard ownership deductions for unencumbered vehicles, confirmation of their plans will be denied.”

Objection to food clothing and miscellaneous deductions (Chapter 13 Trustee) Denied

“All Objections by the Trustee as to the necessity or reasonableness of the deductions claimed for food, clothing, and other miscellaneous items are denied.”

Objection to retirement contribution deductions (Chapter 13 Trustee) Denied

“With regard to Trustee’s Objection to the deductions claimed by the Chauvins and Guidry for contributions to a qualified retirement account, to the extent the deductions are within the tax deferred limits of the Internal Revenue Code, they will be allowed and the Objection of the Trustee will be denied.”

In Re Grant
· 2008-02-27
Motion to convert to chapter 13 (Debtor) Denied

“Accordingly, the Motion to Convert is denied.”

In Re Stewart
· 2008-04-10
Motion for sanctions and damages (Debtor) Granted

“The Court will assess damages in the amount of $10,000.00, plus $12,350.00 in legal fees, for the abusive imposition of unwarranted fees and charges (late fees and inspection costs); the illegal imposition of fees disguised as costs (BPO charges); the negligent imposition of fees and costs not due (legal charges and deposits reimbursed); the improper calculation of escrow payments; the misapplication of payments contrary to the terms of the Note and Mortgage; the failure to notify Debtor of fees and charges on her account; and the improper payment of unnoticed fees and charges during pending bankruptcies.”

Request for corrective accounting audit (Debtor) Granted

“In order to rectify this problem in the future, the Court orders Wells Fargo to audit every proof of claim it has filed in this District in any case pending on or filed after April 13, 2007, and to provide a complete loan history on every account.”

Jones v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (In Re Jones)
· 2007-04-13
Turnover and return of overpayment claim (Debtor) Granted

“For the reasons set forth above, Wells Fargo will be ordered to return the sum of $16,852.01 in accordance with this Opinion.”

Request for personal time damages (Debtor) Denied

“Debtor’s request for damages incurred as a loss of personal time are denied because he did not prove at trial that he suffered any monetary loss as a result of the time he spent working.”

Request for additional stay violation sanctions (Debtor) Moot / procedural

“this Court will consider an award for sanctions for violation of the automatic stay and its Order of confirmation at a separate hearing.”

Port Louis Owners Ass'n v. Savage (In Re Savage)
· 2007-04-13
Embezzlement nondischargeability claim (Port Louis Owners Association) Granted

“The Court finds that the Savages owe the PLOA a $56,866.39 nondischargeable debt under section 523(a)(4) for embezzling insurance proceeds entrusted to them.”

Fraud nondischargeability claim (Port Louis Owners Association) Denied

“The Court finds that the PLOA did not meet its burden of proof under section 523(a)(2)(A).”

Request for attorney fees (Port Louis Owners Association) Denied

“Because the Court bases its findings of nondischargeability on embezzlement only, it will not award attorney’s fees.”

Request for federal legal interest (Port Louis Owners Association) Granted

“However, the Court will award federal legal interest from the date of judicial demand as requested in the complaint.”

Breach of contract and mismanagement counterclaim (Debtors) Denied

“The Court finds that the Savages do not have standing to assert the counterclaim. Therefore, their claims against the PLOA are denied.”

In Re Adams
· 2009-03-27
Objection to plan confirmation (Toyota Motor Credit Corporation) Denied

“For the above reasons, this Court holds that the Debtor may surrender collateral subject to the hanging paragraph in full satisfaction of Toyota’s claim.”

Jones v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. (In Re Jones)
· 2009-10-01
Request for injunctive accounting procedures (Debtor) Granted in part

“For the reasons set forth below, the Court will require Wells Fargo to abide by a modified form of the Accounting Procedures.”

Request for additional punitive damages (Debtor) Denied

“Any additional award of punitive damages is inconsistent with this position.”

In Re Wilson
· 2009-02-06
Motions to quash discovery (Option One Mortgage Corporation and Fidelity National Foreclosure Solutions) Denied

“For the reasons set forth below, the Motions are denied.”

In Re Fitch
· 2008-04-23
Request for attorney fees as respa damages (Debtors) Granted in part

“For the above reasons, the Court does not find the $21,850.00 fee request to be reasonable and awards $3,500.00 in fees.”

Request for additional respa damages (Debtors) Denied

“Accordingly, the Court will not award any additional damages.”

In Re White
· 2006-09-29
Chapter 13 plan confirmation (Debtor) Denied

“An Order Denying Confirmation will be entered separately.”

A historical record

Judge Magner 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.