CRITICAL CASE COMMENT: In re Renteria

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee, Middle District of TN

In re Renteria, 2011 WL 3584477 (Bankr. E.D. Cal. August 1, 2011) (Lee)

A Chapter 13 plan does not violate the unfair discrimination provision by separately classifying co-signed claims, even when there is no distribution to general unsecured creditors.

Case Summary

Amanda Renteria retained the services of an attorney to represent her in a family law dispute involving alleged domestic violence and paternity. Amanda’s mother co-signed and guaranteed the written fee agreement with the . . .

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.

Measuring Success in Chapter 13: Five Years Later

June 6, 2021

By Brian D. Lynch, Bankruptcy Judge, Western District of Washington Five years ago, I wrote an article for this publication, “Measuring Success in Chapter 13,”1 where I criticized some media and academics for repeating an outdated and misleading statistic about the success of chapter 13 cases. So it was disconcerting to see John Oliver recently on Comedy Central’s Last Week...

Members

Critical Case Comment – Present Tense in § 544(b)

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

February 19, 2023

When case converts from Chapter 13 to Chapter 7, the Chapter 7 trustee is not limited to the valuation of the debtor’s home as stated on the original schedules and may capture the increase in equity resulting from the property’s appreciation. (Dales) In re Adams, 2022 WL 2079725 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. June 9, 2022) Case Summary Matthew and Katherine Adams...

Members

Escrow 102 – Part 3 of 4

October 10, 2021

By Michael J. McCormick, Esq., McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce, LLC (Roswell, GA) Escrow 101 – Part 1 Escrow 101 – Part 2 Escrow 101 – Part 3 Escrow 102 – Part 1

Members

Claim Objections: Unusual Burden of Proof

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

November 9, 2025

Party objecting to a proof of claim bears the initial burden of proof to overcome the presumption of validity. Upon overcoming that presumption, the creditor then has the burden of proof to establish the validity of its claim.

Members

Bankruptcy Courts Grapple with the “COVID-19 Discharge”

April 18, 2021

By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction Analyzing the new "COVID-19 discharge" provision added to Chapter 131 by Congress on December 27 as part of the coronavirus emergency response legislation, the Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California decided in In re Ritter2 that, in order to receive such a discharge, debtors must still comply...

Members

Creditors’ Rights and Debtors’ Protections at the Intersection of Consumer Bankruptcy and UCC Article 9

October 25, 2020

In the world of consumer bankruptcy, trustees and debtors' counsel often are uncomfortable with the rules in Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). In this space, we have looked at several places where Article 9 meets the Bankruptcy Code. In this new series, we have been reviewing Article 9's important rules related to consumer transactions.

Members

When (or Not) Is the Best Interests of Creditors Test Applicable in a Modified Plan?

August 22, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) While the best interests of creditors test is applicable upon modification of a Chapter 13 plan, post-petition acquired property of the estate is not included in such analysis in that such property would not be property of a Chapter 7 estate. (Somers) In re Taylor, 2021 WL 3118824 (Bankr....

Members

From the Editor – Claims

February 9, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Unreasonable fees for proof of claim. $4,000 fee for private mortgagee’s proof of claim and objection to proposed plan was unreasonable, and creditor was denied recovery of $7,500 attorney fee for responding to debtor’s objection to proof of claim. The Court considered Fannie Mae’s guidelines for maximum fees related to proof of claim...

Members

The Dilemma of Non-Filing Claims

Keith Rucinski

July 14, 2024

“The non filing and late filing of claims is a national issue with many jurisdictions struggling to address the issue.” Great article, particularly for creditors/creditor attorneys. Not a subscriber? Click here.

Members

When Supervisors Supervise the Supervision of Supervisors

The Academy

September 1, 2024

Micromanaging can foster more harm than good in the workplace.

CRITICAL CASE COMMENT: In re Renteria

Link to Post:

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

Or sign in below:

Related Articles

Measuring Success in Chapter 13: Five Years Later

Critical Case Comment – Present Tense in § 544(b)

Escrow 102 – Part 3 of 4

Claim Objections: Unusual Burden of Proof

Bankruptcy Courts Grapple with the “COVID-19 Discharge”

Creditors’ Rights and Debtors’ Protections at the Intersection of Consumer Bankruptcy and UCC Article 9

When (or Not) Is the Best Interests of Creditors Test Applicable in a Modified Plan?

From the Editor – Claims

The Dilemma of Non-Filing Claims

When Supervisors Supervise the Supervision of Supervisors

Academy

Members

Website

Legal

Looking to Become a Member?

Webinars

Member Articles

Industry News

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