Steven A. Felsenthal

How Judge Felsenthal rules, drawn from 11 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

Judge Felsenthal 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 Texas
Position
bankruptcy
Status
No longer serving
Education
Tulane University (B.A., with honors in political science, 1971); University of Wisconsin Law School (J.D., 1974)
Signed orders read
11

How Judge Felsenthal decides

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

What persuades

After plan confirmation and consummation, focuses jurisdiction on whether the new dispute could conceivably affect implementation of the plan, rather than on historical connections to the debtor.

“The amended complaint would have no conceivable effect on the implementation or execution of the LJM2 plan, and therefore the court lacks jurisdiction under § 1334.”

Reads statutory terms in the context of the full legislative scheme and gives operative effect to each word when resolving commercial-law priority disputes.

“In reading this provision, the court must give significance to every word.”

Procedural preferences

Uses nationwide federal contacts, rather than forum-state contacts, when bankruptcy jurisdiction and nationwide service of process govern personal jurisdiction.

“With federal subject matter jurisdiction, the determination of personal jurisdiction becomes a matter of federal contacts, not state contacts.”

Cautions

Will deny summary judgment where the asserted statutory safe harbor depends on disputed facts about the contract, the party's role, and whether the challenged transfer was ordinary or atypical.

“The summary judgment record does not support a finding that the June 2001 transfer, made four months after the contractual due date, without identification of the January 2001 invoice for the December 2000 gas deliveries, made after two months of collection efforts, and applied only after negotiations, constitutes the type of payment commonly used in the securities trade.”

Signed rulings

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

Newhouse v. Aetna Life Insurance (In re Heritage Southwest Medical Group, P.A.)
03-3972 / 04-3005 · 2004-05-20
Motion to remand or abstain (The trustee and medical providers) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that the motions to remand and/or abstain are DENIED, without prejudice.”

Arkansas Teacher Retirement System v. Merrill Lynch & Co. (In re LJM2 Co-Investment, L.P.)
02-38335 / 04-3525 · 2005-01-14
Motions to remand (The investor plaintiffs) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiffs’ motion to remand is GRANTED.”

Enterprise Leasing Co. of DFW v. Larson King, LLP (In re Southwestern Broadband Holdings I, L.P.)
· 2005-06-08
Summary judgment (Lucent Technologies, Inc.) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that the motion of Lucent Technologies, Inc., for summary judgment is GRANTED.”

In re Aurora Natural Gas, LLC
01-36709 / 01-36900 / 01-36736 / 01-36904 / 03-3564 · 2004-07-09
Motion to strike supplemental appendix (Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C.) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that the motion of Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C., to strike plaintiffs supplemental appendix is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (Edge Petroleum Operating Co., Inc.) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment filed by Edge Petroleum Operating Co., Inc., is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C.) Granted

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment filed by Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C., is GRANTED.”

Summary judgment (GPR Holdings, L.L.C., Golden Prairie Supply Services, L.L.C., and Aurora Natural Gas, L.L.C.) Granted

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion for summary judgment filed by GPR Holdings, L.L.C., Golden Prairie Supply Services, L.L.C., and Aurora Natural Gas, L.L.C., is GRANTED.”

Amerisure Insurance v. ML & Associates, Inc. (In re ML & Associates, Inc.)
· 2003-12-01
Summary judgment (Amerisure Insurance Company) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that Amerisure Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment is DENIED.”

Summary judgment (Hiram Johnson) Granted in part

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Hiram Johnson’s cross-motion for summary judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

L.D. Brinkman Corp. v. Anderco Carpet Co. (In re L.D. Brinkman Holdings, Inc.)
· 2004-05-20
Motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction (Anderco Carpet Co., Inc.) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that the motion to dismiss is DENIED.”

LJM2 Co-Investment, L.P. v. Dodson (In re LJM2 Co-Investment, L.P.)
02-38335 · 2005-07-25
Motions to dismiss (William Dodson) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that the motion of William Dodson to dismiss is DENIED.”

Motion to abstain (Andrew S. Fastow) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the alternative motions of Andrew S. Fastow and Lea Fastow to abstain are DENIED.”

Motion to abstain (Lea Fastow) Denied
Motions to dismiss (Lea Fastow) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of Lea Fastow to dismiss is DENIED.”

Motion for stay (Michael Kopper) Granted in part

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motions of Michael Kopper and Andrew S. Fastow for a stay of this proceeding are GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Motion for stay (Andrew S. Fastow) Granted in part
Motion for stay (Lea Fastow) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion of Lea Fastow for a stay of this proceeding is DENIED.”

Heritage Organization, L.L.C. v. Canada (In re Heritage Organization, L.L.C.)
· 2005-03-08
Motion to vacate arbitration award (The Chapter 11 trustee) Granted in part

“The trustee’s motion to vacate the arbitration award is DENIED IN PART and GRANTED IN PART.”

Objection to claim (The Chapter 11 trustee) Granted in part

“The objection to Canada’s claim is SUSTAINED IN PART, CARRIED IN PART and OVERRULED IN PART, consistent with the court’s ruling on the motion to vacate.”

Motion for entry of judgment (W. Ralph Canada) Granted in part

“Canada’s motion for entry of a judgment is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART.”

Motion for entry of judgment (Gary M. Kornman) Granted

“Kornman’s motion for a final judgment denying Canada’s claims against him based on the arbitration panel’s decision is GRANTED.”

Segner v. Brosseau (In re Offshore Financial Corp.)
· 2005-01-20
Motion for turnover (Milo Segner) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that the motion for a turnover is DENIED without prejudice.”

Motions to dismiss (80451 Holdings, Ltd.) Denied

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motion to dismiss the turnover motion or, in the alternative, to abstain is DENIED without prejudice.”

Motion to abstain (80451 Holdings, Ltd.) Denied
In re GPR Holdings, LLC
01-36736 / 01-36709 / 03-3430 / 03-3406 / 03-3615 · 2004-10-27
Summary judgment (Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C.) Granted

“IT IS ORDERED that the motion of Duke Energy Trading and Marketing, L.L.C., for summary judgment is GRANTED.”

In re DCRI L.P. No. 2, Inc.
03-3161 · 2003-07-15
Motion to pay secured bank claims (DCRI L.P. No. 2, Inc.) Denied

“IT IS ORDERED that the motion to pay secured bank claims from funds held in the registry of the court is DENIED without prejudice.”

Caseload & timing

From public federal docket records for this judge.

All five sampled matters were terminated, but the archive returned no docket entries for any sampled stream.

A historical record

Judge Felsenthal 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.