By Vijay Malik.  Mr. Malik is a law student at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in Meyers v. Toojay’s Mgmt. Corp., joined two other circuits in holding that private employers have the right to deny employment to applicants on the basis of their filing for bankruptcy.

In January 2008, Eric Myers filed a Chapter 7 bankruptcy petition in North Carolina, ultimately leading to a discharge of his debts, and subsequently moved to Florida seeking a fresh start as a supervisor at a Starbuck’s coffeehouse.  During his employment with Starbucks, Myers responded to an advertisement for a management position with a local TooJay’s Gourment Deli restaurant.  Myers interviewed with the regional manager of TooJay’s and participated in a two-day on-the-job evaluation.  During this time, he completed several standard personnel forms, including a confidentiality agreement and authorization of release of personal information for a background check, which allowed TooJay’s to “conduct a comprehensive review” including a review of Myers’ “credit history and reports.”

Myers gave Starbucks two weeks notice after he mistakenly believed TooJay’s hired him.  On the very day he gave notice, however, he received a letter from TooJay’s informing him “that we find it necessary to rescind our previous offer of employment.  The decision was based in whole or in part, on the information provided us in a Consumer Report.”  Upon contacting the company’s human resources department, Myers was notified that the reason he was not hired was that he has filed for bankruptcy, and it was against company policy to hire people who had done so.

Myers filed suit arguing that TooJay’s had discriminated against him because of his bankruptcy filing, violating 11 U.S.C. § 525(b), by refusing to hire him because he filed for bankruptcy and, in the alternative, terminated his employment after he was hired because he filed for bankruptcy.  The wrongful termination claim was sent to the jury, who held that he never became an employee of TooJay’s.

The Bankruptcy Code prohibits employers from engaging in certain actions against those who have filed for bankruptcy.

Section 525(a) provides:

“[A] governmental unit may not . . . deny employment to, terminate the employment of, or discriminate with respect to employment against, a person that is or has been a debtor under this title or a bankrupt or a debtor under the Bankruptcy Act, or another person with whom such bankrupt or debtor has been associated . . . .”

Section 525(b) provides:

“No private employer may terminate the employment of, or discriminate with respect to employment against, an individual who is or has been a debtor under this title, a debtor or bankrupt under the Bankruptcy Act, or an individual associated with such debtor or bankrupt . . . .”

Notably, 525(a) prohibits government employers from both denying and terminating employment because of a bankruptcy filing while 525(b) prohibits private employers from terminating employment because of a bankruptcy filing.

The court held Myers did not have a refusal to hire claim because TooJay’s was a private employer, not a governmental unit.  The court found the district court’s reasoning persuasive:

“A comparison of the words used in subsections (a) and (b) demonstrates that subsection (a) prohibits government employers from ‘deny[ing] employment to’ a person because of his or [her] bankrupt status, whereas subsection (b) does not contain such a prohibition for private employers. Rather, the private sector is prohibited only from discriminating against those persons who are already employees. In other words, Congress intentionally omitted any mention of denial of employment from subsection (b), but specifically provided that denial of employment was actionable in subsection (a). Thus, by its plain language, the statute does not provide a cause of action against private employers for persons who are denied employment due to their bankrupt status. “Where Congress has carefully employed a term in one place but excluded it in another, it should not be implied where excluded.”

The court noted its holding is consistent with other federal courts.  See In re Burnett, ___ F.3d ___, No. 10-20250, 2011 WL 754152, at *2 (5th Cir. Mar. 4, 2011); Rea v. Federated Investors, 627 F.3d 937, 940–41 (3d Cir. 2010); Burnett v. Stewart Title, Inc., 431 B.R. 894, 901 (S.D. Tex. 2010); Fiorani v. CACI, 192 B.R. 401, 407 (E.D. Va. 1996); Pastore v. Medford Sav. Bank, 186 B.R. 553, 555 (D. Mass. 1995); In re Stinson, 285 B.R. 239, 250 (Bankr. W.D. Va. 2002); In re Madison Madison Int’l of Ill., 77 B.R. 678, 682 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. 1987).

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

Copy of Hildebrand-2016
February 27, 2022
Chapter 13 debtor is not obligated to pay both the disposable income pool and the best interest of creditors test pool to achieve confirmation, only the larger of the two; it is not a manifestation of bad faith that the debtor does not pay both the disposable income pool and the best interest of creditors test amounts. (Altenberger) In re...
Academy Circle Logo Final
December 10, 2023
As a professional in an occupation that may often interface with people handling life disruptions (e.g., divorce/separation, unemployment, mortgage foreclosure) you are being asked to participate in a study being conducted by the University of Southern California.
January 5, 2020
By David Cox,1 Cox Law Group, PLLC (Lynchburg, VA) Overview Filing considerations. Perfect Storm! Pensions going down. Healthcare costs going up. Home Equity high. Medical debts increasing. Limited income. Common considerations. Embarrassment. Many of the elderly are from a generation which regards bankruptcy as an indication of moral failure and shame. Confidentiality. May not want family members, including a spouse,...
April 28, 2019
By Leo G. Spanos, Senior Staff Attorney to Martha G. Bronitsky, Chapter 13 Trustee, Northern District of California (Oakland Division) 1. Background & Purpose of Means Test One of the most significant changes introduced BAPCPA is the requirement of a means test to determine whether a debtor qualifies for Chapter 7 relief or, if not, how much a debtor must...
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...
May 21, 2023
(The DuPage County Bar Association grants permission to reprint all or part of this article, Chapter 13 Saves the World! by Arthur Rummler, Volume 29, Issue 9, May 2017 edition of the DCBA Brief. Copyright 2017, DCBA Brief, All Rights Reserved.) We are pleased to reprint an article referred to recently by Director Twomey of the Executive Office for United...
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
December 5, 2021
Although a Chapter 13 debtor has the absolute right to voluntarily dismiss her Chapter 13 case, even after a motion to convert is filed, the Court retains the rights to impose restrictions on the dismissal. (Waites) In re Brittany Frances Minogue, 2021 WL 4453589 (Bankr. D. S.C. September 29, 2021) Summary Brittany Minogue filed a voluntary petition under Chapter 13...
May 10, 2020
By Cathy Moran, Esq. (Redwood City, CA) The timeless questions asked by mankind include “why are we here“, “which came first ...” and “coffee or tea“. Bankruptcy lawyers wrestle with “which controls, b-22 or Schedules I and J“. Having argued and lost the Pak case when BAPCPA was new, and felt vindicated when
October 13, 2019
Taxpayers with expiring Individual Taxpayer Identification Numbers (ITINs) can get their ITINs renewed more quickly and avoid refund delays next year by submitting their renewal application soon, the Internal Revenue Service said 10/10/19. An ITIN is a tax ID number used by taxpayers who don’t qualify to get a Social Security number. Any ITIN with middle digits 83, 84 ....
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
September 24, 2023
In calculating projected disposable income, 13 debtor may deduct entire mortgage payment notwithstanding amount exceeds the housing allowance as established by the IRS Financial Standards Allowance.

Looking to Become a Member? offers a forum to advance continuing education of consumer bankruptcy via access to insightful articles, informative webinars, and the latest industry news. Join now to benefit from expert resources and stay informed.


These informative sessions are led by industry experts and cover a range of consumer bankruptcy topics.

Member Articles

Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.

Industry News

The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: