By Herbert L. Beskin, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Western District of Virginia (Charlottesville) The Seventh Circuit thought that it had finished dealing with the intersection of cars, fines, Chapter 13, and the City of Chicago when it rendered its decision earlier in 2019 in “Steenes I.” In re Steenes, 918 F.3d 554 . Alas, it was not to be,...
From the Editor – Discharge
Print This Article
Link to Post:
By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired)
Ineligibility for loan restructure supported § 523(a)(8) undue hardship. The Chapter 13 debtor had cosigned student loans for former spouse, and the facts that the debtor was not the borrower and that the loans were not government-issued prevented the debtor’s eligibility to restructure the loans under the extended loan repayment provisions of 34 C.F.R. § 685.208. Therefore, the Brunner test was satisfied for undue hardship purposes. The Education Resources Institute, Inc. v. Zumbro (In re Zumbro), ___ Fed.Appx. ____, 2013 WL . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
Did Congress Mean What It Said in Section 1328(i)?
Critical Case Comment – Pro Se Debtor Sanctioned
Critical Case Comment
Cars, Fines, and Chapter 13 in the Windy City
From the Editor
While Chapter 7 Filings Continue to Decline, Chapter 13 Filings are Trending Slightly Upward
Critical Case Comment – Stay Violation: Repossession No, Sale Yes
Critical Case Comment – Time is of the Essence
From the Editor – Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
Critical Case Comment – If Objection, Arrears Gotta’ Be Equal Monthly Installments