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.
Don’t Give Me That Lamie Excuse For The Increase In Attorney Fee-Only Plans
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By John Gustafson, Chapter 13 Trustee (Toledo, OH)
In Lamie v. United States Trustee, 540 U.S. 526, 534, 124 S. Ct. 1023, 157 L. Ed. 2d 1024 (2004), the Supreme Court held that debtors’ attorneys in Chapter 7 cases could not be paid from estate funds.
The concurring judgment in Berliner v. Pappalardo (In re Puffer), 674 F.3d 78, 84-84 (1st Cir. 2012) gave credence to the popular claim that the Lamie decision has had something to do with the increased number of “fee-only” Chapter 13 cases that are being filed around the country . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Critical Case Comment
In Re Carter: A Hard Case (Maybe) Making Bad Law?
Legal Aid and Who Are Our Chapter 13 “Customers”
Critical Case Comment – Sec. 328 vs. Sec. 327 Not Exactly a Smack Down
Duty to Update Trustee Regarding Changes Post-Plan Confirmation
What About Conditional Confirmation?
New Trustee Named
Critical Case Comment – 3002.1 and Reverse Mortgages
Best Practices in Bankruptcy: Power of Attorney or Guardian
Supreme Court Corner: Does Equitable Estoppel Apply in a Fraudulent Conveyance Action?