Hanover Nat. Bank v. Moyses, 186 U.S. 181 (1902)

By Prof. M. Jonathan Hayes

Issue: Is the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 constitutional?

Holding: Yes.

Chief Justice Melville W. Fuller

Hanover Nat. Bank filed suit in District Court seeking to set aside the discharge of the debtor, Max Moyses, on the grounds that the bankruptcy act of 1898 was unconstitutional. The bank had three arguments, 1) the Act improperly permitted individuals, i.e., “non-traders” to file bankruptcy; 2) it improperly granted legislative powers to the states in the form of the exemption laws; and 3) it violated due process because it gave insufficient . . .

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.

From the Editor

March 24, 2019

By Wm. Houston Brown, United States Bankruptcy Judge (Retired) Discharge - Paying more than original loan balance would be undue hardship. The 59-year old debtor employed in aging and disability services couldn’t maintain a minimal living standard without discharge of substantial portion of student loan debt. The Court identified factors included in “minimal standards” in modern American society and found...

Members

New Judge Appointed

The Academy

September 8, 2024

Judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit have appointed J. Barrett Marum as the next bankruptcy judge on the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California.

The PUMP Act

Mark T. McCarty

June 11, 2023

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) has released an updated Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) Minimum Wage Poster that covers employers’ new lactation accommodation obligations under the recently passed Providing Urgent Maternal Protections for Nursing Mothers (PUMP) Act. The PUMP Act went into effect on December 29, 2022 and requires employers to provide nursing employees with reasonable accommodations, such as...

From the Editor – Claims

May 16, 2021

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Unpaid filing fee in prior case was unsecured claim. The Chapter 13 trustee moved for authority to pay unpaid filing fee from prior case, but Court denied that to the extent the motion sought payment ahead of unsecured creditors. The unpaid filing fee was nothing more than a general unsecured claim in the...

Members

Amended Rule 2002(a)(5) – Who Gets Served and Who Petitions the Court for Change?

November 22, 2020

By Phil Lamos, Chief Legal Counsel, Office of the Chapter 13 Trustee Lauren A. Helbling (Cleveland, OH) Bankruptcy Rule 2002(a)(5) directs that 21 days’ notice must be given of the “time fixed to accept or reject a proposed modification of a [Chapter 13] plan.” But to whom must notice be given? Specifically, which creditors need to be given notice? This...

Members

Pump the Brakes: Bad Faith Debtors Are Not Gaming the System (Part II)

January 27, 2019

By Kathryne M. Shaw1 Boleman Law Firm, P.C. (Virginia Beach, VA) Click here for Part 1 In Part I of this article, we reviewed In re Holman, in which the debtors violated their confirmation order and exhibited bad faith . . . It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members. Join...

Members

Ask Ms. Ps & Qs

Nancy B. Rapoport

June 25, 2023

Dear Readers: By now, I’m hoping that all of you are aware of the sad story of the plaintiff’s lawyers in Mata v. Avianca, Inc., Case No. 22-cv-1461 (PKC) (S.D.N.Y). Lawyer A used ChatGPT to “research” a brief; Lawyer A was not admitted in the jurisdiction, so Lawyer B (same firm) entered a notice of appearance; Lawyer B filed Lawyer...

Members

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

October 25, 2020

By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Part V – Consumer Foreclosure Procedures (Continued) Introduction 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...

Members

Critical Case Comment – You Can’t Have Your Cake and Eat it Too

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

December 10, 2023

An over-median Chapter 13 debtor, in calculating projected disposable income, may deduct the higher of the projected plan payment for secured debts or the IRS allowance, but the debtor may not deduct the higher payment under the original contract.

Members

Critical Case Comment – Creditor Not Required to Dismiss Prepetition Nonbankruptcy Action

November 14, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Middle District of TN (Nashville) The automatic stay does not require a creditor pursuing a prepetition nonbankruptcy court action to dismiss that action once a bankruptcy case is filed; requesting continuances and attending status conferences do not constitute “continuation” of the prepetition action for purposes of the automatic stay....

Members