Joel B. Rosenthal
How Judge Rosenthal rules, drawn from 16 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge Rosenthal no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Rosenthal decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
Default interest and late-fee provisions failed where the lender did not connect the charges to credible evidence of actual costs.
“these default rates were simply a reflection of what Mallegni thought the traffic would bear and fail to satisfy either prong of the liquidated damages test.”
Procedural preferences
A party seeking stay relief had to support factual representations as of the filing date, even when later events favored the requested relief.
“Any motion filed with the Court must be true and have support as of the date of the motion.”
Cautions
Nonstandard Chapter 13 plan language needed case-specific justification and could not unilaterally alter creditor rights.
“additional provisions attempting to unilaterally and impermissibly alter creditors’ rights cannot be accepted as the norm.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“With respect to Count I: Judgment for Plaintiff, 219 Forest, as follows: A. The default interest charged in connection with the December Note is DISALLOWED. B. The late fees for the December Note are reduced from 10% to 5%.”
“With respect to Count II: Judgment for the Defendants with respect to the issue of the extension of the December Note.”
“With respect to Count III: . Judgment for the Plaintiff 219 Forest as follows: A. The default interest charged in connection with the March Note is DISALLOWED. B. The late fees for the March Note are reduced from 10% to 5%.”
“With respect to Count IV: Judgment for Plaintiff 219 Forest as follows: A. $32,459.11 is to be reapplied to the March Note as of June 17, 2002, with principal and interest (at the non-default rate) payments recalculated to reflect the reapplication.”
“With respect to Count V: Judgment for the Plaintiff 219 Forest as follows: Defendant LBM’s allowed claim shall be and hereby is subordinated to all of 219 Forest Street LLC’s unsecured creditors.”
“With respect to Count VI: Judgment for Plaintiff 219 Forest against Defendant LBM as follows: A. Treble damages in the amount of $1,101,619.14 plus three times the amount of interest that accrued on the March Note as a result of the misapplication of the $32,459.11 payment.”
“With respect to Count VIII: Judgment for Plaintiff 201 Forest. 201 Forest Street LLC’s guaranty is hereby declared to be null and void.”
“With respect to Count IX: Judgment for Plaintiff 201 Forest as follows: A. The default interest charged with respect to the December Note is DISALLOWED. B. The late fees for the December Note are reduced from 10% to 5%.”
“With respect to Count X: Judgment for 201 Forest against LBM as follows: A. Three times the cost and fees of 201 Forest Street LLC’s chapter 11 proceedings through June 30, 2009.”
“With respect to Count XI: (I) Judgment for Plaintiff 219 Forest as follows: A. Damages in the amount of $10,000 against LBM. *598 B. Damages in the amount of $32,459.11 against Mallegni. (II) Judgment for Defendants with respect to Plaintiff 201 Forest.”
“With respect to Count XII: (I) Judgment for 219 Forest against Mallegni as follows: A. Treble damages in the amount of $1,101,619.14 plus three times the amount of interest that accrued on the March Note as a result of the misapplication of the $82,459.11 payment.”
“The 219 Claim is ALLOWED only to the extent consistent with this Memorandum of Decision.”
“the Motion will be ALLOWED as to the Pre-rejection Royalty Claim”
“the Motion will be ALLOWED as to the Pre-rejection Royalty Claim and the Settlement Proceeds Claim as to administrative status only”
“DENIED as to the Bulk Inventory Royalty Claim and Injunctive Release Claim.”
“The Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Counts II & III is hereby DENIED. Maloney’s Motion to Vacate the Pretrial Order Docket # 38 is hereby GRANTED. Docket # 34 is hereby VACATED. The IRS and the United States’ Motion to Dismiss Count I is hereby GRANTED.”
“Maloney’s Motion to Vacate the Pretrial Order Docket # 38 is hereby GRANTED.”
“the Court finds that the Trustee failed to satisfy his burden under section 6.”
“judgment will enter *12 declaring the Debtor as the equitable owner in part of the Camden property.”
“so much of the Termination Motion that requests entry of paragraphs (B) and (C) of the Proposed Order is DENIED without prejudice.”
“denies without prejudice the Trustee and Bank’s Motion for Determination of the Applicability of Automatic Stay or, In the Alternative, for Section 105 Injunction.”
“For the foregoing reasons, the Objections will be SUSTAINED.”
“the Court finds for the Debt- or, 201 Forest, and determines that the Mortgage is discharged.”
“the Debtor’s Motion to Amend Schedules is ALLOWED, however the Debtor’s homestead exemption is limited to the Water Street parcel and does not apply to the Oak Street parcel.”
“For the reasons set forth herein, Triton’s Motion is DENIED.”
“The Objection is SUSTAINED and confirmation is DENIED.”
“the Trustee’s Motion to Authorize the Sale of Property of the Estate (namely, the Debt- or’s Medicare provider number), Free and Clear of Liens, Claims, and Encumbrances (#75) is ALLOWED on the terms and conditions set forth herein.”
A historical record
Judge Rosenthal 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.