NO DOUBLE RECOVERY.  Case Name: 160 ROYAL PALM, LLC V. ALIBI, LTD. Case 19-01341-EPK Doc 94 Filed 07/01/20.  Erik P. Kimball, Judge United States Bankruptcy Court says no double recovery:  “Bankruptcy courts consistently hold that 11 U.S.C. § 550(a) is intended to restore a debtor to the same position as though the voidable transfer had never occurred, but no more. Bakst v. Wetzel (In re Kingsley), 518 F.3d 874, 877 (11th Cir. 2008); see also Bakst v. Sawran (In re Sawran), 359 B.R. 348, 354 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 2007) (noting that the purpose of 11 U.S.C. § 550 is to “merely restor[e] the estate to its pre-transfer condition”). Bankruptcy courts also rely on 11 U.S.C. § 550(d) to reduce or prohibit recovery when the estate has already obtained return of the challenged transfer. “The crux of the argument holds that if the bankruptcy estate receives prepetition repayment of fraudulent transfers, then the estate, at filing, is in the same position it would have been in notwithstanding the transfers.” In re Pearlman, 515 B.R. at 897. To prevent an inequitable windfall, the Court may take into account pre-bankruptcy transfers back to the Debtor.” [SOME INTERNAL CITATIONS OMITTED]

    Add a header to begin generating the table of contents