Category Archives: squires

Judge John H. Squires (DuPage County, IL)

Congratulations to the New Chief Judge of the Bankruptcy Court (ND IL)

Bankruptcy_court_logo
Congratulations to Judge Bruce W. Black, who will become Chief Judge of the Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois, replacing current Chief Judge Carol Doyle. Chief Judge Black will continue to hear all matters assigned to the Joliet Call on Fridays, which includes cases filed in Will, Grundy, Kendall and LaSalle counties. His chambers will be moving from the 6th to the 7th floor of the Dirsken Federal Building in Chicago. Likewise, his Courtroom will  be changing to Room 719 and Chambers will be located in Room 756. All pending, previously assigned Eastern division cases (with a few exceptions) that do not include the four counties making up the Joliet call will be re-assigned to other judges in the Eastern Division immediately. If your case is affected, you will receive a notice from the Court.   
Click here to view this information on the Bankruptcy Court’s website.
Advertisements

In re Outboard Marine (ND IL ED)(J. Squires)

In re Outboard Marine Corporation, et al., 00-037405
Issued: June 23, 2011
Judge: John H. Squires

Click here to view and download the opinion in .pdf format.

The UpshotWhen sanctions are requested upon a party’s motion pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9011(c)(A), two requirements must be met: the motion must be made separate and apart from other motions or requests and “[must] describe the specific conduct alleged to violate subdivision (b)[,]” and “the motion may not be presented to the court unless, within twenty-one days of service, the non-movant has not withdrawn or corrected the challenged behavior.” The Trustee argues that the Statement of Interest filed by Counsel on behalf of NAEIR warrants sanctions under Rule 9011 because theStipulation released any right NAEIR had to assert a claim against the proceeds of the ACE GL Policies and, as such, the Statement of Interest is not reasonably based in law or fact. Next, the Trustee seeks sanctions against Counsel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927, which provides as follows: Any attorney or other person admitted to conduct cases in any court of the United States or any Territory thereof who so multiplies the proceedings in any case unreasonably and vexatiously may be required by the court to satisfy personally the excess costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees reasonably incurred because of such conduct.

In re Shields/Springer v. Shields (ND IL ED)(J. Squires)

In re Earl W. Shields,  10-000943
800 Springer v. Shields, 10-00693

Issued:    February 8, 2011
By Judge: John H. Squires

Click here to download and view the Opinion in .pdf format.

In re Hanson/Deady v. Hanson (J. Squires)

Bankruptcy In re Stuart M. Hanson d/b/a Hanson & White, LLC, 09-04820

Adversary Michael Deady v. Stuart M. Hanson, 09-00457

Issued October 14, 2010  By Judge John H. Squires

For Plaintiff: William P. Suriano, Esq.

For Defendant: Robert R. Benjamin Esq. & John M. Brom, Esq.

Trustee: Gina B. Krol, Esq.

The Upshot: Motion to Amend judgment order is not a second bite at the apple. The points of law and fact being referred to in the moving party’s pleadings must be placed before the Court so that the Judge is not forced to dig through the record. The outcome here was the same as the outcome in the companion case of Grant, LLC v. Hanson: motion denied.

Download and view the Opinion in .pdf format here.

 

In re Anderson,10-3828 (J. Squires)

IBLB Exclusive!

Wheaton lawyer David J. Boersma recently took on the great and powerful Glenn Steans, Lisle Chapter 13 Trustee and … won? At least that’s how it looks. I just got off the phone with David and he was characteristically humble. The issue before Judge Squires in the matter of In re Anderson was this: Is social security part of the Debtor’s “income” for purposes of a Chapter 13 Plan? Judge Squires answered “No” in this case. Boo-ya. At the moment I’m still combing through David’s 2 massive briefs. He says he poured over 1,000 pages to win this argument and I believe him. Contact David at attorneyboersma@sbcglobal.net to congratulate him, then jump on Pacer and check out his briefs … so to speak Anyway, congratulations David.

 

Proposed Order Form

All motions and proposed orders presented on or after November 1, 2010 must include one of the following fillable “Proposed Order” forms

Form Order for use in bankruptcy case (rev. 10-08)

Form Order for use in adversary case    (rev. 10-08)

Questions, Comments, Suggestions? Use the “E-Order Feedback” tool provided by the Court on this page.

In re Hanson/Grant LLC v. Hanson

Bankruptcy:   In re Stuart M. Hanson, 09-04820
Adversary: 6050 Grant LLC v. Hanson, 09-00447

Opinion issued Oct. 5, 2010 by the Honorable John H. Squires

Upshot: After a hearing the Court determined that $93,461.29 owed by the Debtor to 6050 Grant was non-dischargeable under §523(a)(2)(A).  Two weeks after entry of the Opinion, Debtor filed a motion to alter it. According to Rule 59(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, incorporated here by Bankruptcy Rule 9023, a judgment may be amended based on one or more of the following: the Court’s manifest error of law or fact, newly discovered evidence, or a change in controlling law. Under the circumstances, the Court found none of these conditions, so the judgment stands.

Click here to view and download the Opinion in .pdf format.