Stay It Isn’t So! Is the Automatic Stay Eroding in the Tenth Circuit?

By Karin N. Amyx, Staff Attorney to the Trustee Carl Davis (Wichita, KS)

The automatic stay is perhaps the most well-known aspect of the Bankruptcy Code. Frankly, it’s the reason most debtors file bankruptcy – to make everything stop and get some breathing room. Of course, exceptions exist to the breadth of the stay1, but historically it prohibits post-petition conduct to exercise control over estate property.2

Several “acts” are prohibited by the stay, including acts to obtain possession or control over estate propertyIt 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.

Small Business Reorganization Act…(“SBRA”) H.R. 3311 – Part Two

September 22, 2019

By Jan Hamilton, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Topeka, KS) I. The Plan1 A. Notions to Consider before the Plan is Filed… Time for Filing of the Plan. No later than 90 days after the filing of the case, the debtor is required to file a plan, unless the court extends the time if the “need is attributable to circumstances for...

Members

Navigating Secured Creditors Who File Unsecured Chapter 13 Claims

October 31, 2021

By Eric K. Fox, Esq. (Hendersonville, TN) Jane Debtor has a home with a mortgage. An unsecured creditor obtains a judgment against Jane for, say, a credit card debt. Creditor’s attorney records a certified copy of the judgement order with the county register of deeds, thereby converting the unsecured claim against Jane in personam, to a secured claim against her...

Members

Avoidance Powers in Chapter 13 – Part 5 of 6

January 27, 2019

By John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Ohio, Western Division (Toledo, OH) Click here for Part 1 Click here for Part 2 Click here for Part 3

Members

Creditors’ Rights and Debtors’ Protections at the Intersection of Consumer Bankruptcy and UCC Article 9

January 17, 2021

By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) PART VII – CONSUMER CREDITORS' PENALTIES FOR VIOLATIONS OF FORECLOSURE AND OTHER ARTICLE 9 RULES Introduction In this space, we have looked at numerous topics involving the operation of Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) in bankruptcy; in the current series, we are reviewing Article 9's important rules...

Members

Critical Case Comment – Bad Faith to Not Pay Both Tests?

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

February 27, 2022

Chapter 13 debtor is not obligated to pay both the disposable income pool and the best interest of creditors test pool to achieve confirmation, only the larger of the two; it is not a manifestation of bad faith that the debtor does not pay both the disposable income pool and the best interest of creditors test amounts. (Altenberger) In re...

Members

From the Editor – Curing Default

October 27, 2019

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Debtor could cure default beyond 60 months. Agreeing with In re Klaas, 858 F.3d 820 (3d Cir. 2017), bankruptcy court had discretion to permit debtors to cure plan default, allowing a reasonable grace period beyond the 60 months of confirmed plan. Dismissal of the case for plan default was not required under §...

Members

Negotiating Plan Confirmation with Secured Creditors – Issues Involving Balloon Payments and Other Mortgage Loans Subject to Modification Under § 1322(c) – Part 2 of 3

November 15, 2020

By David Cox,1 Cox Law Group, PLLC (Lynchburg, VA) Click here for Part 1 II. Dealing With Balloon, Short Term and Related Mortgage Secured Claims Under §§ 1322(c)(2) And 1325(a)(5). § 1322(c)(2) provides that: “Notwithstanding subsection (b)(2) and applicable nonbankruptcy law . . . It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to...

Members

Turnover by Motion? How About Under Rule 6008?

February 28, 2021

By Joseph A. Bledsoe, III (“Jody”), Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Eastern District of North Carolina (New Bern) In the aftermath of City of Chicago v. Fulton, discussions abound as to whether it is sufficient for a chapter 13 debtor to seek return of his vehicle, repossessed prepetition, via a motion for turnover. Most seem to believe a motion...

Members

Bozeman Revisited: The Anti-Modification Clause Chisels Away at Espinosa

Herbert L. Beskin

July 16, 2023

Remember Mort. Corp. of the South v. Bozeman (In re Bozeman), 57 F. 4th 895 (11th Cir. 2023)? That was the recent 11th Circuit case previously reviewed by Lawrence Ahern on this site. It was the Chapter 13 version of The Perfect Storm. The Debtor proposed to pay the principal balance of her mortgage ($17 . . . It looks...

Members

Rule 3002.1 Does Not Justify Punitive Sanctions

September 19, 2021

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Nashville, TN) In order for a bankruptcy court to impose sanctions for contempt, Taggart compelsa finding of a violation of a clear and unambiguous order; the bankruptcy court lacks inherent power to issue punitive sanctions under Rule 3002.1. (Jacobs) PHH Mortgage Corporation v. Sensenich, 6 F.4th 503 (2nd Cir. August 2,...

Members