Critical Case Comment – In re Vining, 2008 WL 2073966 (Bankr. N.D. N.Y. May 14, 2008)

In re Vining, 2008 WL 2073966 (Bankr. N.D. N.Y. May 14, 2008)

The disposable income test mandates distributions of a minimum amount to unsecured creditors each month of a Chapter 13 Plan.

Summary of the Case

An unsecured creditor and the Chapter 13 trustee objected to confirmation of the debtor's proposed Chapter 13 plan, arguing that the debtor was not paying all projected disposable income over the applicable commitment period. Although the original objection . . .

It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.

Or Sign In Below:

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Who Is the Person Sitting at That Workstation? Contractor? Employee? Exempt?

Merideth Akers

January 22, 2023

Who is the person sitting at that workstation? Is it Noah Non-exempt? Is it Emma Exempt? Or, is it Connie Contractor? It is vital that I know who the person is sitting at that workstation. Do I have to pay the person sitting at that workstation overtime pay? Can I reduce the person’s pay for leaving an hour early? Do...

Members

The Case for Conduit Mortgage Payments

Max Gardner

January 23, 2022

Max Gardner’s Top Ten Reasons The late Waylon Jennings had a hit song years ago called “Sick and Tired of Getting Up Sick and Tired.” The song related to the chronic consumption of alcohol but the analogy to the need for a mandatory rule for mortgage payments through the Chapter 13 Trustee is not that far-fetched. As a debtor’s attorney...

Members

From the Editor

September 27, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Disgorgement of fees for nondisclosure. The Tenth Circuit held that the “default sanction” for an attorney’s failure to satisfy disclosure obligation is full disgorgement of fees paid. While full disgorgement may not be required in particular circumstances, the “default sanction” principle required reversal and remand. The bankruptcy court, affirmed by the BAP, had...

Members

Critical Case Comment – Pre to Pre and Post to Post

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

March 5, 2023

Mortgage loan servicer violated mortgage agreement with debtor, the automatic stay, the confirmation order and Rule 3002.1 by applying debtor’s post-petition monthly mortgage payments pursuant to the contractual terms of the loan, thereby applying post-petition payments to the debtor’s pre-petition mortgage arrearage. (Cary) In re Pope, 647 B.R. 597 (Bankr. D. N.H. August 15, 2022) Case Summary In November of...

Members

From the Editor

September 20, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Debt buyer was debt collector under FDCPA. The Ninth Circuit agreed with the Third Circuit that an entity purchasing consumer debts qualified as a debt collector under the Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1692(a)(6), even though it outsourced the actual debt collection activity. McAdory v. M.N.S. & Assoc., LLC, 952 F.3d 1089 (9th Cir....

Members

Escrow 101 and 102

Michael J. McCormick, Esq.

August 13, 2023

In the fall of 2021, Michael McCormick provided subscribers with an EXCELLENT, expository, seven-part outline on mortgage escrow. This information is just as relevant today as when we first published it with one important update . . . When the next escrow analysis is performed and the servicer has received less than 12 payments of escrow (and often zero, as is often the case after the borrower received a forbearance during the COVID pandemic), the escrow balance will be far less than anticipated!!

Members

Practice Tips from Hon. Meredith Jury (Ret.)

October 17, 2021

(Published with the consent of the Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys Assn Newsletter, October 2021) By M. Jonathan Hayes, Resnik Hayes Moradi LLP (Encino, CA) Question from old bankruptcy lawyer: Judge Jury, chapters 13s are such a huge amount of work. Do you have any pointers on avoiding common mistakes? Response from Judge Jury: Of course! I will focus on...

Members

From the Editor – Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

February 2, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Limitations period for actions under FDCPA. Construing the statute of limitations for actions against debt collectors under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), the Supreme Court held that “absent the application of an equitable doctrine, the statute of limitations in § 1692k(d) begins to run on the date on which the alleged...

Members

Mortgage Loan Modification Does Not Alter Lien Priority

December 6, 2020

By Scott F. Waterman, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Reading) Modifying a first mortgage is one of the most common loss mitigation tools available to bring a loan current to prevent foreclosure. In this case the first mortgage was modified twice by capitalizing the unpaid interest, reducing the interest rate, and reducing the monthly payments...

No Room for Error? Determining Whether Your “Secured” Creditor Has a Fatally Deficient UCC-1

March 22, 2020

By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Click here for Part I Click here for Part II Part III - Description of Collateral Introduction The . . . It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members. Join Now Or Sign In Below: Username or Email Password Remember me...

Members