The NACTT Academy offers a comprehensive community for bankruptcy professionals seeking to advance their education in consumer bankruptcy.
ConsiderChapter13.org 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.
Written by industry experts, these articles provide in-depth analysis and practical guidance on consumer bankruptcy topics.
The Academy is the go-to source for the latest news and analysis in the Chapter 13 bankruptcy industry.
CRITICAL CASE COMMENT: In re Balas
Print This Article
Link to Post:
In re Balas, 2011 WL 2312169 (Bankr. C.D. Ca., June 13, 2011) (Donovan)
A same-sex couple, legally married under applicable state law, may file a joint petition in Chapter 13, notwithstanding the Defense of Marriage Act.
Case Summary
Gene Balas and Carlos Morales were legally married in California in August 2008 and, in February 2011, filed a joint Chapter 13 petition. The United States Trustee moved to dismiss the case pursuant to § 1307(c), arguing that Mr. Balas and Mr. Morales were ineligible to file a joint petition because both . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Objections to Claims: Two of These Creditors Are Not Like the Others [1]
Critical Case Comment – You Might as Well Plan for the Wrecked Car
Johnson Retires
Special Counsel 101: Getting Paid and Protecting Clients
Progeny of Law v. Siegel: Sixth and Ninth Circuits Say Right to Dismiss Chapter 13 Case is Absolute, Not Qualified by Section 105
Critical Case Comment – Pay the TAXES!
Critical Case Comment – Watch for Opportunities to Bifurcate Home Mortgage Claims
Unscheduled Creditor May Not File a Late Proof of Claim
Eviction and Bankruptcy Remedies
Arbitration in Bankruptcy: Reading Opinions & Tea Leaves in Recent Supreme Court & Lower Court Actions Part IV