Too Good Not to Share

This is a worker’s comp case but was simply too good not to post. Female employee traveling for her employer met a “friend.” With him, at her hotel, became “injured whilst engaging in sexual intercourse when a glass light fitting above the bed was pulled from its mount and fell on her.” She sued the employer under the Australian equivalent of workers comp – and won!

Yes, you really just read that. Sexual Intercourse While Swinging From A Motel Chandelier: Employer Held Liable For Injuries Sustained Australian case you have to read to believe.

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Here’s What People Should Know About Taking Early Withdrawals from Retirement Plans

April 21, 2019

Taxpayers may need to take money out of their individual retirement account or retirement plan early. However, this can trigger an additional tax on top of other income tax they may owe. Here are a few key things for taxpayers to know: Early Withdrawals. An early withdrawal normally is taking cash out of a retirement plan before the taxpayer is...

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

January 17, 2021

By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) PART VII – CONSUMER CREDITORS' PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF FORECLOSURE AND OTHER ARTICLE 9 RULES Introduction In this space, we have looked at numerous topics involving the operation of Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) in bankruptcy; in the current series, we are reviewing Article 9's important rules...

Members

Duty to Disclose Substantial and Unanticipated Changes in Debtor’s Financial Condition

Angela M. Scolforo

December 11, 2022

In the case of In re Ilyev, 17-12987-KHK (Bankr. E.D. VA July 26, 2022), Judge Kenney granted the Chapter 13 Trustee’s motion to modify the plan to require the Debtor to repay some of the $29,250 of disposable income he retained by not making his mortgage payments during an 18-month Covid forbearance. The Debtor never disclosed to the Trustee, or...

Members

Critical Case Comment – Pay the TAXES!

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

July 10, 2022

Failure of Chapter 13 debtors to satisfy post-petition property tax payments to the county, specifically required in the debtors’ Chapter 13 plan, renders the debtors ineligible for a discharge, even where the debtors proposed a loan modification to repay the mortgage creditor which had advanced the post-petition taxes. (Rodriguez) In re Villarreal, 2022 WL 1102223 (Bankr. S.D. Tex. April 12,...

Members

Bankruptcy Protections Limited for Repeat Filers

January 13, 2019

By William H. Brown, Academy Editor & Advisor The First Circuit held that under § 362(c)(3)(A), upon the repeat filing by Chapter 7, 11 or 13 debtors within one year of dismissal of a prior pending case, the automatic stay terminates entirely on the 30th day after filing of the subsequent case as to the debtor, property of the debtor...

Members

Critical Case Comment

July 25, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) Are private educational student loans automatically excepted from discharge by § 523(a)(8). (Jacobs) Homaidan v. Sallie Mae, Inc., Navient Solutions, LLC, 2021 WL 2964217 (2nd Cir. July 15, 2021) Case Summary Hilal Homaidan received a number of educational loans to attend College. Shortly after graduation, he filed a Chapter...

Members

Negotiating Plan Confirmation with Secured Creditors – Issues Involving Balloon Payments and Other Mortgage Loans Subject to Modification Under § 1322(c) – Part 3

November 22, 2020

By David Cox,1 Cox Law Group, PLLC (Lynchburg, VA) III. Providing for the Secured Mortgage Claim, as Modified. A. Does the requirement of § 1325(a)(5)(B)(iii) for equal monthly payments permit the Debtor to propose a balloon payment in the payment of the creditor’s claim? Equal Monthly Payments Required By § 1325(a)(5)(B)(iii) Does NOT Permit Debtor To Propose A Balloon Payment....

Members

Critical Case Comment – Siegel v. Fitzgerald

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

June 19, 2022

Congress’ enactment of differing fees for U.S. Trustee states and Bankruptcy Administrator states violated the uniformity provision of the Bankruptcy Clause of Article I of the Constitution. (Sotomayer) Siegel v. Fitzgerald, 2022 WL 1914098 (S.Ct. June 6, 2022) Case Summary In 2008, the retail chain, Circuit City Stores, filed a Chapter 11 petition. In 2010, Circuit City’sliquidating plan was confirmed...

Members

After Chicago v Fulton: Not Only Cars – A Survey of Fulton Rulings and a Weakened Automatic Stay

Hale Andrew Antico

December 11, 2022

Intro: What is a Fulton ruling? When Chicago v Fulton (In re Fulton), 141 S Ct. 585 (Sup Ct, 2021) was first decided by the Supreme Court, there was a consensus among bankruptcy attorneys that the erosion of the automatic stay with regard to turnover was only about cars. That is, Fulton was a narrow ruling that was only about...

Members

A Fond Farewell to 007 – Frank M. Pees

May 3, 2020

On April 30, 2020, Frank M. Pees will retire from his position as the Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Worthington) for the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division. Mr. Pees has been a Trustee since his appointment in 1978. Throughout his career, he has been actively involved in the National Association of Chapter 13 Trustees, serving as President (in 1987), and...

Members