Dear Readers: There are some basic truths. One is that when someone says, “hey, watch this!,” the result is likely to involve blood or stitches. Another is that, when an author describes something with the leadoff word, “interestingly,” it often isn’t. And a third is that one shouldn’t mislead bankruptcy judges. In two wonderfully written cases, bankruptcy judges made this...
Critical Case Comment
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By Kevin R. Anderson, Chapter 13 Trustee for the District of Utah
Meyer v. Scholz (In re Scholz), 699 F.3d 1167 (9th Cir. Nov. 15, 2012) (Watford)
An anti-anticipation clause in a governmental or private retirement plan or trust does not exclude such income from the calculation of current monthly income and projected disposable income under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(b).
Case Summary
The debtor was a railroad retiree and received $3,600 per month under the Railroad Retirement Act (RRA). Railroad employees do not participate in Social Security but are covered by . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Federal Payments for Foster Care and Adoption Assistance in Bankruptcy
Avoidance Powers in Chapter 13 – Part 5 of 6
Small Business Chapter 11 Update, Where Are We Eight Months In?
Trustee Cannot Require Debtor to Treat Nondischargeable Student Loan Debts in a Separate Class
Yet Another Reason Why the Means Test is “Broken”
Ms. Ps & Qs
From the Editor – Eligibility
Critical Case Comment – Pro Se Debtor Sanctioned
Passing of the Honorable Randall L. Dunn
New Judge Appointed