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
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III
Parks v. Drummond (In re Parks), 2012 WL 3193342 (9th Circuit BAP, August 6, 2012) (Jury)
Section 541(b)(7)(A) does not authorize Chapter 13 debtors to exclude voluntary post-petition retirement contributions in any amount for purposes of calculating their disposable income.
Case Summary
The Parks filed a Chapter 13 petition in January 2011. They were employed, had income above the applicable median income for their state, and had been contributing approximately $318 a month to their respective 401(k) retirement plans. In calculating their disposable income on Form 22C, the . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Can a Secured Claim Still “Ride-Through” Bankruptcy Despite BAPCPA? Part 2: Looking Beyond In re Rhodes
Critical Case Comment – Topping Off the Risk Factor
From the Editor – Discharge Injunction
ABI Commission on Consumer Bankruptcy – Definition of “Tax Return” for Purposes of Nondischargeability
Why Your Bankruptcy Client Doesn’t Understand You (And How to Fix the Problem)
Judge Carol A. Doyle: Pre-Retirement Interview
Student Loans in Existing Chapter 13’s
Eviction and Bankruptcy Remedies
New and Revised Bankruptcy Forms
Reaffirmations Impose Impossible Demands on Bankruptcy Counsel