DIDN’T SEE THAT COMING: RECENT SUPREME COURT DECISIONS AND ETHICS

-

Link to Post:

(Reprinted from Norton Bankruptcy Law Adviser, January 2011, with permission.  Copyright © 2011 Thomson Reuters/West.  For more information about this publication please visit www.west.thomson.com.)

By Thomas F. Waldron – U.S. Bankruptcy Judge (Retired)

INTRODUCTION

The last term of the United States Supreme Court produced several significant bankruptcy decisions: Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz v. United States, 130 S. Ct. 1324, U.S. 2010, United Student Aid Funds Inc. v. Espinosa, 130 S. Ct. 1367, U.S. 2010 and Hamilton v. Lanning . . .

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.

Related Articles

What IS a Principal Residence?

June 30, 2019
By Phil Lamos, Chief Legal Counsel, Office of the Chapter 13 Trustee Lauren A. Helbling (Cleveland, OH) Section 1322(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code states that a Chapter 13 plan may not modify a claim that is “secured only by a security interest in real property that is the debtor’s principal residence.” But the inverse of this statute is true; if...
View Article
Members

Yet Another Arrow in the Quiver of the “Less Than Honest Debtor”?

January 6, 2019
By Academy Staff In July of 2016 ConsiderChapter13.org posted an article, “Another Arrow in the Quiver of the ‘Less Than Honest Debtor’.” That article addressed a decision of the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee in In re Hurt, 2015 WL 9592064 (Bankr. E.D. Tn. 2015), in which the Court overruled the Trustee’s objection to exemptions. In Hurt,...
View Article
Members

Post-Petition Causes of Action, Inheritances and Windfalls Are Property of the Estate and Must Be Reported to the Trustee – Part 5 of 5

August 11, 2019
By John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Ohio, Western Division Click here for Part 1 Click here for Part 2
View Article
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016

Critical Case Comment – Pre-Confirmation Payments

June 26, 2022
Even though the Model Plan in the district provides that the applicable commitment period starts from confirmation, the debtor may not apply pre-confirmation payments toward payments made during the applicable commitment period but must apply those payments in addition to the applicable commitment period payments. (Applebaum) In re Batoha, 2022 WL 1310943 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. May 2, 2022) Case Summary...
View Article
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016

Critical Case Comment–84 Months: Lifesaver or Anchor?

February 12, 2023
Section 1329(c), as it currently exists, forecloses the ability of Chapter 13 debtor to modify a confirmed plan to alter the plan payment amount while maintaining an extended plan, previously approved under the CARES Act. (Hanan) In re Nelson, 2022 WL 6795096 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. October 11, 2022) Case Summary Immediately after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress sought...
View Article
Members

From the Editor

September 27, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Debtors’ attorney fees not authorized under Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). Although the Chapter 13 debtors had prevailed before the Ninth Circuit, In re Sisk, 962 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 2020), their application for attorney fees as prevailing parties under EAJA was denied. That Act did not authorize awards of attorney fees...
View Article
Members
image002

Do I Really Have to Tell the Trustee About Newly Acquired Assets?

January 9, 2022
It has long been a vexing question for Trustees and attorneys alike: do Debtors have to disclose assets acquired post-petition? In a lengthy and well-documented opinion, Chief Bankruptcy Court Judge John Waites of South Carolina has presented his take on this issue and concluded, with some important exceptions, that they do not. The case is In re Thomas L. Boyd,...
View Article
Members

Negotiating Plan Confirmation with Secured Creditors – Issues Involving Balloon Payments and Other Mortgage Loans Subject to Modification Under § 1322(c) – Part 2 of 3

November 15, 2020
By David Cox,1 Cox Law Group, PLLC (Lynchburg, VA) Click here for Part 1 II. Dealing With Balloon, Short Term and Related Mortgage Secured Claims Under §§ 1322(c)(2) And 1325(a)(5). § 1322(c)(2) provides that: “Notwithstanding subsection (b)(2) and applicable nonbankruptcy law . . . It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to...
View Article
Members

Recent Trends in the Interpretation of Midland v. Johnson and the Applicability of the FDCPA to Bankruptcy Cases

January 3, 2021
By Mark C. Leffler, Boleman Law Firm, PC (Richmond, Hampton, and Va. Beach, VA) Part I: Derby v. Portfolio Recovery Associates Recently, Hon. Keith L. Phillips of the Eastern District of Virginia Bankruptcy Court issued his fourth and final written opinion in the Derby v. Portfolio Recovery Associates adversary proceeding, Adv. Pro. No. 18-03097-KLP, 2020 Bankr. LEXIS 2589 (Bankr. E.D.Va....
View Article
Members

From the Editor – Confirmation

March 8, 2020
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Plan did not properly address 910 creditor’s liens. Finding that the plan did not satisfy one of the three options for addressing a secured claim under § 1325(a)(5), specifically failing to provide for the 910 creditor’s retention of lien, the Panel observed that in response to the creditor’s objection to confirmation, the debtors...
View Article
Members

The NACTT Academy offers a comprehensive community for bankruptcy professionals seeking to advance their education in consumer bankruptcy.

Academy

Members

Website

Legal

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.