Miller v. Schaub (In re Schaub), No. 11-01811 (DHS), 2012 WL 1144424, at *3–*4 (Bankr. D.N.J. Apr. 4, 2012) (Steckroth)

Miller v. Schaub (In re Schaub), No. 11-01811 (DHS), 2012 WL 1144424, at 3–4 (Bankr. D.N.J. Apr. 4, 2012) (Steckroth)

The exception to discharge in § 1328(a)(4) is not limited to prepetition awards of restitution or damages. “A past participle is simply the form of the verb used in the phrase and does not suggest past action. . . . The underlying policies of section 1328(a)(4) support an interpretation that does not require judgment be obtained prepetition in order to be nondischargeable. . . . The plain meaning of section 1328(a)(4) . . . effectively ‘pits a tortfeasor against his victim in a race to the courthouse.’ . . . This Court . . . is reluctant to insulate a debtor’s wrongful conduct based solely on the vagaries of timing.”

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

The Untouchables – Starring Social Security Income

Nicole P. Novak

March 5, 2023

In a recent opinion, an Ohio bankruptcy court joined the majority of other courts by holding the Code excludes Social Security Act (“SSA”) benefits from disposable income.i The issue was brought before the Court by the Chapter 13 Trustee’s objection to confirmation. The objection to confirmation asserted the Debtors failed to commit all disposable income to their plan and included...

Members

2022 Bankruptcy Procedure Year in Review: Revised Statute and Rules and Selected Cases Part 8 Selected Decisions Under Part III of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure

Lawrence R. Ahern, III

April 30, 2023

Introduction One new rule and amendments to 16 rules took effect December 1, 2022. Many reflected changes necessitated by the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA), and had been in place in the same or similar form on an interim basis since that legislation took effect. Part 1 of this series summarized . . . It looks like you...

Members

From the Editor – Attorney Sanctioned

June 14, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Attorney sanctioned for filing identical schedules in two cases without updating financial information. The same attorney represented a debtor in two cases filed sixteen months apart, but the attorney filed essentially identical schedules in both cases, violating Rule 9011 by failing to make reasonable inquiry before filing the second case. The schedules in...

Members

2022 Bankruptcy Procedure Year in Review: Revised Statute and Rules and Selected Cases – Part 3 Rules Related to SBRA (Continued)

Lawrence R. Ahern, III

December 4, 2022

Introduction This series reviews developments in bankruptcy procedure during 2022. Amendments to 16 rules and new one new rule take effect December 1, 2022, absent Congressional action. Many reflect changes necessitated by the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA),1 and have been in place in the same or similar form on an interim basis since that legislation took effect.

Members

Safeguarding the Promise of a Fresh Start: Utilizing RESPA to Challenge Mortgage Servicing Errors Post-Discharge

Stephen F. Relyea

July 10, 2022

For many of the consumer debtors my firm represents, the primary purpose of filing bankruptcy is to save their home or other real estate from being foreclosed upon by their mortgage servicer. We help those debtors file and comply with chapter 13 plans that propose to resolve their defaulted mortgages in a variety of ways, which might include curing pre-petition...

Members

Never Let a Good Crisis Go to Waste: The Bankruptcy Amendments in the Consolidated Appropriations Acts of 2021

January 10, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee (Nashville, TN) Other than a recluse without any information of current events, we have been made fully aware of the fact that Congress was fashioning a second stimulus/COVID relief bill. The result is the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021; a massive bill with more than 5,300 pages governing a huge expanse of appropriations,...

Members

9th Circuit Joins the Bandwagon

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

June 18, 2023

The Ninth Circuit has now joined its sister Circuit in holding that the Bankruptcy Code does not permita Chapter 13 Trustee to retain the percentage fees collected on payments that a chapter 13 debtor made pre-confirmation in accordance with 26 U.S.C. §586 but, upon dismissal prior to confirmation of the plan, is obligated to return the fee to the debtor,...

Members

Critical Case Comment

July 11, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) A prior servicer of a mortgage claim subsequently transferred to another servicer could be held liable if the transferor servicer provided inadequate or incorrect information to the transferee. (Aron) In re Bivens vs. NewRez LLC (In re Bivens), 625 B.R. 843 (Bankr. M.D. N.C., March 25, 2021) Case Summary...

Members

From the Editor – Discharge Injunction

March 14, 2021

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Section 524(i) applies only to long-term debts not discharged through plan. Whether § 524(i) applied to short-term secured debts that are paid in full and discharged through a Chapter 13 plan was a matter of first impression, with the Court finding no other court had yet decided precise question. Factors used in Supreme...

Members

Critical Case Comment – “Extraordinary” Key to Set Aside Dismissal

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

November 13, 2022

Chapter 13 debtor must demonstrate extraordinary circumstances to justify the extraordinary relief of setting aside or “reconsidering” an order dismissing a Chapter 13 case. (Cary) In re Canas, 2022 WL 10707000 (Bankr. D. Ma. October 18, 2022) Case Summary Nelson and Annemarie Canas filed a Chapter 13 petition in August of 2019. The debtors immediately fell behind on their proposed...

Members