Ask Ms. Ps & Qs

By Professor Nancy Rapoport

$200,000 Sanctions Order for Vexatious Litigation Gets Affirmed

Dear Readers:

The Academy’s Regina Logsdon forwarded me an article about a recent 6th Circuit BAP decision affirming a $200,000 sanctions order (In re Royal Manor Management . . .

It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.

Or Sign In Below:

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Related Articles

September 8, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction Four bankruptcy-related bills were enacted during the 116th Congress and signed into law on August 23, 2019.1 The legislation affected both business and consumer cases. One bill, the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 (SBRA),2 deals on its face with a non-consumer topic. However, it will be of great...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
In order to modify a plan confirmed under Chapter 12 pursuant to § 1229, the movant must demonstrate that there was a substantial change in circumstances that is sufficient to justify modification of a plan.  (Norton) Farm Credit Services of America PCA v. Swackhammer, 2023 WL 3591920 (8th Cir. BAP May 23, 2023) Case Summary The Swackhammers were farmers who...
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
I never set out to be a bankruptcy lawyer, much less a trustee. It was always my intent to be trial lawyer. The thrill of victory, the agony of defeat, and the captive audience of a jury; having to think fast on your feet was exciting. Facing jurors and witnesses with a modicum of confidence was what my view of...
Merideth Akers
November 6, 2022
“Does wearing these horizontal stripes make me look fat?” My wife, Becky, tells me that clothes with horizontal stripes make one look broad or fat. However, wearing clothes with vertical stripes create the illusion of making one look tall or slim. Smart fashion designers design clothing that creates the illusion that people are something they are not. I must confess...
July 19, 2020
By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction In Copley v. United States,1 Chapter 7 debtors attempted to exempt under Virginia law their right to a prepetition federal income tax overpayment refund. After the bankruptcy filing, the IRS set off the overpaid funds to satisfy the debtors' tax liabilities under 26 U.S.C. § 6402. In a matter...
Members
Copy of Hildebrand-2016
Bankruptcy courts lack jurisdiction to apply “innocent spouse” relief to determine the amount of a tax claim to be paid in a Chapter 13 case.  (Taddonio) In re Geary, 2023 WL 2996720 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. April 19, 2023) Case Summary When a taxpayer signs a joint tax return with their spouse, the Internal Revenue Code is very clear.  Both signatories...
Members
December 13, 2020
By Margaret A. Burks, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Southern District of Ohio (Cincinnati) Chapter 13 works. Some people wish to continually criticize Chapter 13. They criticize the success rate. They criticize racial bias. They criticize how Chapter 13 works. They also criticize the fact that Chapter 13 appears less voluntary than it was before access to Chapter 7...
image002
July 16, 2023
Remember Mort. Corp. of the South v. Bozeman (In re Bozeman), 57 F. 4th 895 (11th Cir. 2023)? That was the recent 11th Circuit case previously reviewed by Lawrence Ahern on this site. It was the Chapter 13 version of The Perfect Storm.  The Debtor proposed to pay the principal balance of her mortgage ($17 . . . It looks...
Members
August 18, 2019
By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) PART I Overview Introduction Four bankruptcy-related bills have been passed by both the House and the Senate this term. The legislation was sent to the President for signature on August 13, 2019.1 The bills were not controversial and had bipartisan support. The legislation affects both business and consumer cases. One...
Members
February 3, 2019
By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Middle District of TN (Nashville) Where a Chapter 13 plan provides that a mortgage payment will be paid “outside the plan,” the plan does not “provide for” the mortgage payment and, accordingly, the discharge under § 1328 is not applicable to the mortgage obligation. Dukes v. Suncoast Credit Union, 909...
Members