By William Houston Brown, Adviser, Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education, Inc. and Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown and Ahern (Nashville, TN) In two February opinions, the Supreme Court addressed issues that appear in bankruptcy cases, one dealing with a common practice of entering nunc pro tunc orders and the other affecting determination of property rights under state law. In a...
In re Roderick
Print This Article
Link to Post:
CRITICAL CASE COMMENT
In re Roderick, 425 B.R. 556 (Bankr. E.D. Ca. March 8, 2010) (Klein)
The Court may utilize the provisions of Rule 4004(c)(2) to defer the entry of a discharge to provide a Chapter 7 debtor an opportunity to negotiate a mortgage modification.
Case Summary
It is not unusual for a borrower, seeking to modify a mortgage with a mortgage servicer, to file a Chapter 7 bankruptcy to discharge unsecured debts, hoping that the modification will be finished before the Chapter 7 case is over. Unfortunately . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Critical Case Comment – Swackhammer Smackdown
Escrow 102 – Part 1 of 4
The Dangers of Extending a Plan Too Long – Or Alternatively, Why Take as Little Time as Possible
Two Supreme Court Decisions with Effects on Bankruptcy Practice
From the Editor – Claims
From the Editor – Claims
Good or Bad Faith?
From the Editor
From the Editor
Pump the Brakes: Bad Faith Debtors Are Not Gaming the System