By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) Exemptions in consumer cases have always presented difficult problems for practitioners and trustees. In a bow to states’ rights, the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 deferred to exemptions created by state law. When BAPCPA was enacted in 2005, Congress continued the practice of allowing each state to “opt out” of...
Critical Case Comment
Print This Article
Link to Post:
Two recent cases broadly interpret the exclusion in § 101(10A) for “benefits received under the Social Security Act”.
Case Summary
The two cases, one from the Bankruptcy Court in Virginia, and the other from the Ninth Circuit Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, involve different benefits paid to the Debtor but ultimately reached the same conclusion that the benefits are excluded from the calculation of Current Monthly Income even though neither of the Debtors received any benefits directly from the Social Security Administration. In Adinolfi v. Meyeri, the Debtor received benefits under the Adoption . . .
It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members.
Or sign in below:
Related Articles
Delaware Trustee Michael Joseph to Retire
What to Do with the Dreaded Timeshare?
A Review of Residential Mortgage “Stripping,” Recent Developments and the Effect of 11 U.S.C. § 1111(b) – Part 1Strategies in Modification of Residential Mortgages
Gambled and Lost – Again
Claim Objections: Unusual Burden of Proof
Whose Plan is it Anyway?
Mortgage Loan Modification Does Not Alter Lien Priority
From the Editor – Confirmation
Small Business Reorganization Postscript 2
ABI Commission on Consumer Bankruptcy – Recommendations Related to Exemptions