By William Houston Brown, Adviser, Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education, Inc. and Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown and Ahern (Nashville, TN) In two February opinions, the Supreme Court addressed issues that appear in bankruptcy cases, one dealing with a common practice of entering nunc pro tunc orders and the other affecting determination of property rights under state law. In a...
Critical Case Comment
Print This Article
Link to Post:
Matteson v. Bank of America (In re Matteson), 535 B.R. 156 (BAP 6th Cir. August 10, 2015) (Preston)
The failure of a mortgage creditor to file a proof of claim in a Chapter 13 case will preclude that creditor from receiving distributions under a confirmed plan but will not result in the reduction of any debt during the pendency of the case nor will it affect the lien rights of the creditor which will survive the bankruptcy.
Case Summary
At the time they filed their Chapter 13 petition, the Mattesons were current on their mortgage . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or Sign In Below:
Related Articles
What to Do with the Dreaded Timeshare?
It Takes a Village
Lawyers are People Too: An Interview with Aki Koyama, Staff Attorney to Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Kathy Dockery
ABI Commission on Consumer Bankruptcy – Post-Petition Changes in Value
Critical Case Comment
From the Editor – Plan Modification
ABI Commission on Consumer Bankruptcy – Dischargeability of Homeowner Association Fees
When Wishes Come True
Two Supreme Court Decisions with Effects on Bankruptcy Practice
Critical Case Comment