Critical Case Comment

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Middle District of Tennessee (Nashville)

A confirmed Chapter 13 plan can substitute for a filed proof of claim and can bind the trustee to making distributions in accordance with that plan when the order recognizes a claim as “allowed.”

Diruzzo v. Boyajian, 527 B.R. 800 (1st Cir. BAP, March 31, 2015) (Cary)

Case Summary

In August of 2008, the Diruzzos filed a Chapter 13 petition listing Pawtucket Credit Union as a general unsecured creditor in the amount of $75,641. They listed the . . .

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.

Postpetition Borrowing by a Consumer Debtor in Chapter 13 – Part 1 of 2

May 5, 2019

By Judge Michael A. Fagone & Career Law Clerk Ciera S. Dye Although our Nation’s bankruptcy laws are uniform, chapter 13 practice in our Nation’s bankruptcy courts varies to a significant extent in the different judicial districts. One example of this variation is the treatment of postpetition borrowing by a consumer debtor in chapter 13.i Neither the Bankruptcy Code nor...

Members

CFPB Settles with Student CU Connect CUSO Over ITT Private Loan Program

June 16, 2019

On 6/14/19, the CFPB (Bureau) announced a settlement with Student CU Connect CUSO, LLC (CUSO), a company set up to hold and manage private loans for students at ITT Technical Institute. The Bureau filed a complaint and a proposed stipulated judgment in federal district court for the Southern District of Indiana alleging that CUSO provided substantial assistance to ITT Educational...

Critical Case Comment – The Plan Rules

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

December 4, 2022

Chapter 13 plan which provided a specific amount to be cured on a reverse mortgage under § 1322(b)(5) would be controlled by the specific term of the plan provision and not by the larger proof of claim filed by the creditor. (Baer) In re Edelstein, 2022 WL 16730027 (Bankr. N.D. Ill. November 7, 2022) Case Summary The Edelsteins filed Chapter...

Members

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

Bankruptcy Court Broadly Interprets “Engaged in Business” Requirement for Subchapter V Eligibility

May 23, 2021

By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction The Bankruptcy Court for the District of Colorado ruled recently, in a case styled In re Ikalowych,1 that while eligibility for subchapter V of Chapter 112 requires that 50% of a debtor's debt must arise from commercial or business activities, the debtor was not required to be directly involved...

Members

Supreme Court Revisits Finality of Orders in Bankruptcy: Comment on Ritzen and Review of “Finality”

February 9, 2020

By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Introduction The Supreme Court unanimously held on January 14 that an order denying stay relief was final in Ritzen Group, Inc. v. Jackson Masonry, LLC.1 Thus, the creditor should have appealed the denial instead of waiting until later in the case to seek again to pursue its pre-bankruptcy litigation against...

Members

An Argument in Favor of the Mid-Case Audit: B.R. 3002.1 Proposed Changes

Molly Simons

August 28, 2022

If you put your ear to the ground you may hear the rumblings regarding a change to Bankruptcy Rule 3002.1 requiring the institution of a mid-case bankruptcy audit. This mid-case audit would be like the Notice of Final Cure but would be performed by a trustee’s office in the middle of a pending Chapter 13, rather than at the end,...

Members

Who Is Stupid Here?

Cathy Moran

February 25, 2024

“The headline was ‘Are your clients really stupid?’ . . .The answer isn’t what you’re tempted to respond.” The second in a 3-part series on treating clients as we would want to be treated. More on this topic: Why Listening Is a Bankruptcy Lawyer’s Superpower

Members

Critical Case Comment–IRS and the “Innocent Spouse”

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

May 14, 2023

Bankruptcy courts lack jurisdiction to apply “innocent spouse” relief to determine the amount of a tax claim to be paid in a Chapter 13 case. (Taddonio) In re Geary, 2023 WL 2996720 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. April 19, 2023) Case Summary When a taxpayer signs a joint tax return with their spouse, the Internal Revenue Code is very clear. Both signatories...

Members

Critical Case Comment – New Bankruptcy Term – “Sale Plan”

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

January 1, 2023

Confirmation of a “sale” plan (proposing the sale of the debtor’s principal residence) depends upon how quickly the sale will be consummated, milestones established, and consequences for failing to meet those deadlines; a plan that makes payments to the mortgage company under a “sale” plan may not modify the rights of the mortgagee but if care is taken to comply...

Members