Mark B. McFeeley
How Judge McFeeley rules, drawn from 24 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
Judge McFeeley no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge McFeeley decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
A prior contested federal judgment could establish nondischargeability when the earlier findings resolved every required element and the debtor had a full opportunity to litigate.
“A contested motion for summary judgment that results in the entry of summary judgment can satisfy the requirement that the opposing party had a full and fair opportunity to litigate the issues as well as the requirement that the prior matter be ‘actually litigated’.”
Cautions
A contractual failure did not become fraud without proof that the agreement was fraudulently obtained.
“The agreement to remodel Plaintiffs’ home was breached, but Plaintiffs have not shown that the agreement was obtained through Defendant’s fraud.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
The court denied dismissal or conversion only on the express condition that the debtor confirm a plan by February 27, 2009; the conditional ruling is retained outside statistics.
“Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that the $20,000 at issue was not obtained by false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud and is, therefore, dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A).”
“Upon consideration of the evidence and testimony admitted at the final hearing, the Court finds that Ms. Adams violated 11 U.S.C. § 110. Consequently, the Court will impose sanctions and assess fines against Ms. Adams as determined below.”
“Consequently, the Court will grant the Motion and enter summary judgment in favor of the FTC.”
“IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, THAT Defendants Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs claim for non-dischargeability of debt under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A) is DENIED. ORDERED FURTHER that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment at to Plaintiffs claim for non-dischargeability of debt under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(B) is GRANTED.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that the Motion to Dismiss will be granted as to Count I of Plaintiffs Complaint alleging that Contempt Judgment is non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A). The Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss will be denied as to Counts II, III, and IV of the Complaint”
“THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that to the extent the Motion to Dismiss seeks to dismiss the cause of action to avoid the transfers pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 548, it is granted; and FURTHER ORDERED that to the extent the Motion to Dismiss seeks to dismiss the cause of action to avoid the transfers under NMUFTA, it is denied.”
“Therefore, the Court finds there are material issues of fact and summary judgment is DENIED.”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court concludes that Mr. Steffien’s discharge should be revoked under 11 U.S.C. § 727(d)(2).”
“Based on the foregoing, the Court HEREBY DENIES the Debtor’s claim of exemption in the Property.”
“WHEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the Application to Employ is GRANTED, effective as of June 22, 2007, subject to the inclusion of the language clarifying that all fees and thereunder, including any fees and/or costs that may fall within the indemnification provision, are subject to all the restrictions of 11 U.S.C. § 330.”
Caseload & timing
From public federal docket records for this judge.
All five sampled matters were terminated, with a median recorded duration of 3,121 days. Their entry streams were empty and supplied no classifiable motion outcome.
A historical record
Judge McFeeley 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.