From the Editor

From the Editor – Co-Debtor Stay

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired)

Co-debtor stay applied only to consumer debt of the debtor. In a case filed by only one spouse, the credit card company did not violate the co-debtor stay when it sued the debtor’s non-filing husband for collection of a credit card debt incurred by the husband on a credit card that was solely his. Section 1301(a) does not define “consumer debt of the debtor,” but the “best reading of the co-debtor stay involves shielding non-filing co-debtors from actions to collect on . . .

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.

Appendix – A Review of Residential Mortgage “Stripping,” Recent Developments and the Effect of 11 U.S.C. § 1111(b)

July 18, 2021

A Brief Summary of "Strip Down" and "Strip Off" Rules Lawrence R. Ahern, III Brown & Ahern Nashville, Tennessee Most Academy readers do not need an in-depth primer on lien-stripping, but this Appendix is designed to provide a high-level summary of the most important rules involved, as interpreted by the courts since enactment of the Bankruptcy Code and as affected...

Members

Critical Case Comment

March 14, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee (Nashville) Despite a split in authority, funds held by a Chapter 13 Trustee at the time a case is dismissed prior to confirmation, are subject to the trustee’s commission before any balance is returned to the debtor. In re Doll, 17-20831-MER (Bankr. D.Colo. Feb. 19,...

Members

Critical Case Comment – You Gotta Fix Your Own Screwups, on Your Own Dime

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

December 3, 2023

Debtor’s counsel should not be compensated for work undertaken on behalf of a debtor in order to correct errors.

Members

Locked Out: Blocked Mortgage Portals May Be Violation of the Stay

Kara K. Gendron

November 10, 2024

A new case has shed light on a common practice by mortgage companies -- denying Chapter 13 debtors access to online payment portals. This case brought to the forefront a significant issue for Chapter 13 debtors across the country—the need for accessible payment methods that allow them to stay current with their mortgage payments and successfully complete their repayment plans.

Members

Rules, Means-Test Amounts and Miscellaneous Fees: Changes Wrap Up 2020

November 15, 2020

Lawrence R. Ahern, III Brown & Ahern Nashville, Tennessee Appendix C Bankruptcy Court Miscellaneous Fee Schedule (28 U.S.C § 1930) Effective December 1, 2020 Description Current Fee Adjusted Fee Exemplification $22 $23 Reproduction of audio recording of court proceeding $31 $32 Filing amendment to debtor's schedules $31 $32 Search fee $31 $32 Filing any document that is not related to...

Members

The Valuation Problem Under § 1325(a)(4)

Brittani Bushman

June 9, 2024

“The U.S. Supreme Court has remarked that “[v]alue is a word of many meanings.” This is particularly true in bankruptcy, where the concept of value comes up repeatedly throughout the Bankruptcy Code, but “value,” with few exceptions, is not defined.”

Members

Critical Case Comment–84 Months: Lifesaver or Anchor?

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

February 12, 2023

Section 1329(c), as it currently exists, forecloses the ability of Chapter 13 debtor to modify a confirmed plan to alter the plan payment amount while maintaining an extended plan, previously approved under the CARES Act. (Hanan) In re Nelson, 2022 WL 6795096 (Bankr. E.D. Wis. October 11, 2022) Case Summary Immediately after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress sought...

Members

Did You Really Rely Upon That?

Angela M. Scolforo

September 11, 2022

The Mississippi Bankruptcy Court in The Huntington National Bank vs. Ashley Mosby, case #21-11614, adversary case #21-1028, on September 1, 2022, denied the bank’s request to declare a debt non-dischargeable because the bank did not rely upon the debtor’s false statement. In this case the Debtor purchased a 2020 Dodge Challenger, financed by the bank, without disclosing she intended to...

Members

Admissions by a Party Opponent Usually Saves the Day but Not Always

Judge Corali Lopez-Castro

February 9, 2025

“. . . Rules of Evidence can be confusing . . . , particularly the rules about hearsay. Is a statement hearsay but admissible under an exception? Or, is the statement non-hearsay and, therefore, admissible under another rule?” Judge Lopez-Castro takes a look at admissions you will want to read!

Members

September 27, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Debtors’ attorney fees not authorized under Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA). Although the Chapter 13 debtors had prevailed before the Ninth Circuit, In re Sisk, 962 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 2020), their application for attorney fees as prevailing parties under EAJA was denied. That Act did not authorize awards of attorney fees...

Members

From the Editor – Co-Debtor Stay

Link to Post:

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

Or Sign In Below:

Related Articles

Appendix – A Review of Residential Mortgage “Stripping,” Recent Developments and the Effect of 11 U.S.C. § 1111(b)

Critical Case Comment

Critical Case Comment – You Gotta Fix Your Own Screwups, on Your Own Dime

Locked Out: Blocked Mortgage Portals May Be Violation of the Stay

Rules, Means-Test Amounts and Miscellaneous Fees: Changes Wrap Up 2020

The Valuation Problem Under § 1325(a)(4)

Critical Case Comment–84 Months: Lifesaver or Anchor?

Did You Really Rely Upon That?

Admissions by a Party Opponent Usually Saves the Day but Not Always

From the Editor

Academy

Members

Website

Legal

Looking to Become a Member?

Webinars

Member Articles

Industry News

To get started, please let us know which of these best fits your current position: