Critical Case Comment: In re Davis

In re Davis, 2011 WL 5884015 (Bankr. N.D. Tex., November 23, 2011) (Lynn)

To determine whether a “special circumstance” exists to permit extra deductions in calculating a debtor’s projected disposable income, a court must examine: what the IRS would have considered a normal expense; must look at a debtor’s circumstances to see if they differ from a typical person; and must consider whether there is a reasonable alternative to incurring the expense.

Case Summary

The Davises were above-median income debtors who calculated their disposable income deducting from Current Monthly Income a number . . .

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.

U.S. Trustee Fee Unconstitutional

The Honorable William Houston Brown

June 12, 2022

On June 6, the Supreme Court’s unanimous opinion in Siegel v. Fitzgerald1 held that the increase in U.S. Trustee fees in Chapter 11 cases violated the uniformity requirement of the Constitution’s Bankruptcy Clause,2 because the fee increase in 2017 only applied to in the U.S. Trustee districts and didn’t apply to the Bankruptcy Administrator districts in Alabama and North Carolina....

Escrow 102 – Part 3 of 4

October 10, 2021

By Michael J. McCormick, Esq., McCalla Raymer Leibert Pierce, LLC (Roswell, GA) Official Form 410A1 On December 1, 2015, Official Form 410A (herein, “Form 410A” or “the Form”) became effective. This attachment to the proof of claim is only required if the loan is secured by the debtor’s principal residence. In addition to a breakdown of the arrears to be...

Members

Are Your Loyalties Divided?

August 22, 2021

By Cathy Moran, Esq., (Redwood City, CA) When a married couple books a bankruptcy consultation, you have an immediate problem: There be dragons, as early map makers helpfully provided. Because, as a lawyer friend of mine says: Anytime there are two people sitting across from you, you have a conflict of interest. That pithy expression has stuck with me and...

Members

Taxes, Offset, and Mutuality

October 13, 2019

By Cathy Moran, Esq. (Redwood City, CA) Bankruptcy lawyers are accustomed to evaluating the dischargeability of taxes when deciding when to file a client's bankruptcy case. But as we approach the end of the tax year, a client’s current year tax situation becomes another moving part in the “when do we file” analysis. In the simplest situation, the client owes...

Members

Objection: Hearsay

July 12, 2020

By Wayne Silver, Wayne Silver Law (Redwood City, CA) There you are, client on the witness stand, judge listening intently, story being told on direct exactly the way you prepared her, things going just swimmingly. And then opposing counsel stands and utters those two lovely words…”Objection, hearsay.” Huh? That’s ridiculous, you confidently think to yourself, just as you hear the...

Members

Meet a Newish Trustee

January 24, 2021

On October 1, 2019, John G. Jansing was appointed Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Southern District of Ohio at Dayton. John took over from Jeff Kellner, who retired and moved to New Hampshire. John had some great mentors: Herb Beskin in Charlottesville, Marge Burks in Cincinnati and Faye English in Columbus. John toured Herb’s office in January 2020 and...

Who Gets the Trustee’s Fee and When?

August 8, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee, Middle District of TN (Nashville) Chapter 13 trustee is not compelled to return the percentage fee taken from a Chapter 13 case when the case is dismissed prior to confirmation. Harmon v. McCallister, 2021 WL 3087744 (9th Cir. BAP July 20, 2021) (Gan) Case Summary Douglas and Christine Harmon filed a Chapter...

Members

Avoidance Powers In Chapter 13 – Part 2 of 6

January 6, 2019

By John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Ohio, Western Division (Toledo, OH) Click here for Part 1 of 6 Click here for Part 3 of 6 Click here for Part 4 of 6 Click here for Part 5 of 6 Click here for Part 6 . . . It looks like you are not signed in...

Members

Critical Case Comment– Reverse Mortgage May be Modified

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

May 22, 2022

A reverse mortgage, having fallen due as a result of the death of the borrower, is not protected from modification by the borrower’s heirs by virtue of § 1322(c)(2). (Halfenger) In re Sandoval, 2022 WL 982182 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. March 31, 2022) Case Summary Juan Sandoval filed Chapter 13 and proposed a plan which dealt with his principal asset, a...

Members

Critical Case Comment

June 27, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) It constitutes an unfair discrimination, violative of 11 U.S.C. § 1322(b)(1), for a Chapter 13 plan which would pay more to a student loan than to the remaining general unsecured creditors. (Somers) In re Kane, 603 B.R. 491 (Bankr. C.D. Kan. June 18, 2019) Case Summary Ronald Kane filed...

Members