Jump to Navigation

Legal News

Case Summaries

Bankruptcy Law

[05/14] Hall v. US
In Chapter 12 bankruptcy proceedings in which the debtors proposed treating a capital gains tax on the postpetition sale of their farm as an unsecured claim to be paid to the extent funds were available, with the unpaid balance being discharged, the objection of the IRS is sustained, as the federal income tax liability resulting from the sale was not "incurred by the estate" under section 503(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, and thus was neither collectible nor dischargeable in the Chapter 12 plan.

[05/14] In re Heritage Highgate, Inc.
In a residential home builder's Chapter 11 proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court's determination that the secured claims of a group of secondary creditors should be valued at zero is affirmed, where: 1) in proceedings to value secured claims under section 506(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, a burden-shifting analysis is appropriate; 2) the Bankruptcy Court properly concluded that the fair market value of the debtor's project as of the plan confirmation date controlled whether the creditors' claims were secured; 3) denying the creditors future lot sale proceeds that exceed the project's judicially determined value as of confirmation did not constitute a form of impermissible lien stripping; and 4) the Bankruptcy Court did not clearly err in determining the value of the collateral securing the secured debt.

Read More

Criminal Law & Procedure

[05/16] Bracher v. Superior Court (People)
In cases in which misdemeanor defendants in El Dorado County were required by the trial court to be present at a readiness and settlement conference, a petition for writ of mandate or prohibition is granted, where: 1) the case was not moot because the petition presented an issue that was likely to recur while evading review; and 2) a blanket court policy requiring that all misdemeanor defendants personally appear at a readiness and settlement conference is inconsistent with applicable case law and the statutory scheme.

[05/16] US v. Powell
In a prosecution for making, or aiding and abetting the making of, a false entry in a bankruptcy-related document, conviction and sentence are affirmed against contentions that: 1) the district court erred in failing to provide several requested jury charges; 2) the prosecutor committed reversible misconduct; 3) defense counsel provided ineffective assistance; and 4) the district court improperly refused to apply a mitigating role adjustment in sentencing.

Read More

Family Law

[05/16] Marriage of Green
In a dispute between ex-spouses over the husband's CalPERS pension, which included four years of credit for past military service purchased with community funds, the trial court's characterization of the credit as the husband's separate property is reversed, where prior to the marriage, the husband's right to the credit amounted to no more than an expectancy, which is not a property right divisible upon dissolution of marriage, since he held no unconditional, contractual right to the payment of benefits, or even a nonvested right to such credit, before he actually purchased the credit during the marriage, using community funds.

[05/15] In re A.S.
In juvenile court proceedings involving a brother and sister whose permanent plan called for them to be placed in foster care: 1) an order permitting the siblings to be placed separately is affirmed, and 2) an order approving an application to administer psychotropic medication to the boy is affirmed, as California Rules of Court, rule 5.640(c)(8) comports with due process.

Read More

Associated Press text, photo, graphic, audio and/or video material shall not be published, broadcast, rewritten for broadcast or publication or redistributed directly or indirectly in any medium. Neither these AP materials nor any portion thereof may be stored in a computer except for personal and non-commercial use. Users may not download or reproduce a substantial portion of the AP material found on this web site. AP will not be held liable for any delays, inaccuracies, errors or omissions therefrom or in the transmission or delivery of all or any part thereof or for any damages arising from any of the foregoing.

Facebook Twitter LinkedIn
Contact Us

Bold labels are required.

Contact Information
disclaimer.

The use of the Internet or this form for communication with the firm or any individual member of the firm does not establish an attorney-client relationship. Confidential or time-sensitive information should not be sent through this form.

close

"Attorney Keith Knochel is an excellent lawyer. He won my case and I received $500,000. He discussed the case with me thoroughly. His performance in front of the jury was excellent and he had a smart strategy to cope with the opposing attorney..."

~ Anthony (Former Client)

"I highly recommend Knochel Law. They helped win our case many, many years ago against our wackadoo landlord that was breaking into our house when we were out of town! The people at Knochel Law that worked with us were very knowledgeable, friendly, and did a great job keeping us informed!"

~ Havaweb Havasu (Former Client)