From the Editor - Modification of Plan • NACTT Academy

From the Editor – Modification of Plan

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired)

Noticing requirements apply to pre-confirmation modification. Rule 2002(a)(5) and 2002(b)(2) noticing requirements apply to pre-confirmation modifications of a plan, and the notice is required to all creditors. The debtors argued that the clerk’s notice of the 341 meeting gave sufficient notice of the deadline to object to confirmation of the original plan, and those creditors failing to timely object were not required to receive notice of subsequent pre-confirmation modification, but the court held that any modification resets the time for objections . . .

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.

Social Media Scams: Con Artists Target the Vulnerable

Michael B. Joseph

July 23, 2023

Social media and internet dating sites have given rise to romance and confidence schemes. Catfishing and spear phishing are extensively used. Catfishing is faking an identity on the internet. Spear phishing uses more sophisticated and direct messages to trick the victim. New AI programs make it easier to reach and victimize the targets. The fraudsters prey upon the elderly, widowed...

Members

Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in City of Chicago v. Fulton

December 22, 2019

By William Houston Brown, Editor/Adviser, Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education On December 18, 2019, the Supreme Court granted the City of Chicago’s petition for certiorari, 2019 WL 6880702, from the decision of the Seventh Circuit at 926 F.3d 916 (7th Cir. June 19, 2019). The Seventh Circuit’s decision was analyzed in a prior article on this website. In its decision,...

Members

Bankruptcy Conversion and Exemption Objection Deadlines

Hale Andrew Antico

December 17, 2023

Does a converted bankruptcy case restart the deadline for objections to exemptions? This is one of those articles that makes subscription to ConsiderChapter13.org “worth the price of admission”!

Members

Herb Beskin – A Proclamation

Angela M. Scolforo

October 22, 2023

Upon this auspicious occasion, seeing before us this eloquence of attorneys, let us recount the mighty deeds of one Herbert Lee Beskin. WHEREAS, Herbert was born and began his legal career in the last century (or we presume); and WHEREAS, a double Hoo, Herbert graduated from the University of Virginia with a B.A. in 1972, and stayed in Charlottesville to...

Happy Thanksgiving

November 19, 2023

As our ‘thank you’ to our loyal readers, we bring you a completely non-password protected issue! ENJOY.

From the Editor – Claims

June 21, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Portion of divorce award was priority domestic support claim and portion dischargeable unsecured claim. Applying Third Circuit’s factors from In re Gianakas, 917 F.2d 759 (3d Cir. 1990), and considering special master’s intent in divorce proceedings, one-third of former spouse’s claim was priority domestic support but two- thirds was reclassified as general unsecured...

Members

Measuring Success in Chapter 13: Five Years Later

June 6, 2021

By Brian D. Lynch, Bankruptcy Judge, Western District of Washington Five years ago, I wrote an article for this publication, “Measuring Success in Chapter 13,”1 where I criticized some media and academics for repeating an outdated and misleading statistic about the success of chapter 13 cases. So it was disconcerting to see John Oliver recently on Comedy Central’s Last Week...

Members

From the Editor – Claims

October 20, 2019

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Debtor’s objection to tax claim for being “too low” was rejected. Noting that the debtor could not benefit prior to distribution to creditors, in event trustee found assets for distribution, debtor’s objection to claim filed by tax creditor on basis that claim was “too low” was rejected. “The debtor comes last, not first,...

Members

From the Editor – Plan Modification

June 7, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) HAVEN Act applied to modification when plan was confirmed prior to Act becoming law. The debtor proposed a plan modification deleting from disposable income $1,789 monthly VA disability benefits. First concluding that the HAVEN Act was applicable law at time of this decision, nothing in the Act, its legislative history or the Official...

Members

Is a CARES Act Stimulus Payment Exempt?

April 26, 2020

By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction Since April 1, 2020, many unemployed people in the United States have begun to receive "a recovery benefit" in the amount of $1,200.1 These payments, under the CARES Act2 stimulus program, were intended to provide some relief to suffering Americans. However, the most financially distressed Americans, perhaps with existing,...

Members