From the Editor – Rule 3002.1

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired)

Mortgage creditor entitled to postpetition fees and costs but amount reduced. The Chapter 13 debtor was bound by state court’s determination that creditor was entitled to enforce the mortgage that had been transferred, and the contract provided for reasonable attorney fees. The requested fee of $72,671 was reduced to $62,475 to reflect that the creditor’s unsuccessful pursuit of a title insurance claim was not a reasonable expense for the debtor to pay. In re Marks, 548 B.R. 703 (Bankr. D. S.C . . .

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.

United Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. Espinosa Ten Years After

May 3, 2020

By Hon. Brian Lynch, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Western District of Washington, Tacoma Division When the Supreme Court issued United Student Aid Funds, Inc. v. Espinosa1 on March 23, 2010, commentators were perplexed.2 On the one hand, the Court upheld the 9th Circuit’s ruling allowing a hardship discharge of student loans in a chapter 13 plan. The Court held that...

Members

Mortgage Matters in Times of COVID-19

April 5, 2020

By Robert (Bob) Schuman, Owner/Managing Broker, Network Financial Group Is it 2008 again? For us in the mortgage industry, we woke up this week feeling as if during the night, we were transported back to 2008 when the mortgage industry basically collapsed. Then, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the FHA were the exceptions. As of March 25, 2020, like everything...

Members

Laudable, Shortsighted, and Vague: The CDC’s Eviction Moratorium

October 18, 2020

By Riley F. Tunnell, Esq., Godwin Bowman PC (Dallas, TX) The COVID-19 pandemic is not the product of a single cause. So, our remedial efforts must address a myriad of causes and rapidly developing effects. The CDC believes that delaying the onset of the mass-eviction to a time when we may be better able to manage this virus is a...

Members

U.S. Trustee Fee Unconstitutional

The Honorable William Houston Brown

June 12, 2022

On June 6, the Supreme Court’s unanimous opinion in Siegel v. Fitzgerald1 held that the increase in U.S. Trustee fees in Chapter 11 cases violated the uniformity requirement of the Constitution’s Bankruptcy Clause,2 because the fee increase in 2017 only applied to in the U.S. Trustee districts and didn’t apply to the Bankruptcy Administrator districts in Alabama and North Carolina....

Critical Case Comment – Pre-Confirmation Payments

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

June 26, 2022

Even though the Model Plan in the district provides that the applicable commitment period starts from confirmation, the debtor may not apply pre-confirmation payments toward payments made during the applicable commitment period but must apply those payments in addition to the applicable commitment period payments. (Applebaum) In re Batoha, 2022 WL 1310943 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. May 2, 2022) Case Summary...

Members

Critical Case Comment

May 2, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee (Nashville) In calculating an above-median income debtor’s projected disposable income, the court may deduct from the debtor’s current monthly income only the expenses as listed in the IRS manual and not the debtor’s actual expenses. (Taylor) In re Rodriguez, 520 B.R. 94 (B.A.P. 9th Cir....

Members

Critical Case Comment – But It’s a GOLF CART!

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

November 20, 2022

A golf cart is a motor vehicle and may be exempted by a Chapter 7 debtor under state law. (Loyd) In re Smith, 2022 WL 3023209 (Bankr. W.D. Okla. July 28, 2022) Case Summary Bobby Smith filed a Chapter 7 petition and listed his golf cart as an exempt asset under Oklahoma law because it was a “motor vehicle.” The...

Members

Trustee May Use Any Law Available to Avoid a Transfer

March 17, 2019

By Herbert L. Beskin, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Western District of Virginia (Charlottesville) *Special thanks to Gretchen D. Holland for editing this article. Facts In Vieira v. Gaither (In re Gaither), Bankr. D. S.C., # 18-01317-dd, Adv. Pro. 18 80040-dd, Chapter 7 case; 11/30/18 opinion (Duncan); 2018 Bankr. LEXIS 3816, the Debtors’ son died in an aviation accident in...

Members

Can a Secured Claim Still “Ride-Through” Bankruptcy Despite BAPCPA? – Part 1 In re Rhodes Says, “Let Me Count the Ways”

Lawrence R. Ahern, III

January 30, 2022

Background A recent Chapter 7 case out of the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of California, In re Rhodes,1 addresses reaffirmation in a context that is very significant and should be of interest to all debtor's attorneys. It points out that the "ride-through" of a debtor's secured debt in Chapter 7—which Congress tried to eliminate in 2005—still exists. In...

Members

Five Things Trustees Should Know About the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019

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