Impact of Supreme Court’s Decision on § 523(a)(2)(B)

By William H. Brown, Brown and Ahern (Nashville, TN)

11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)

(a) A discharge under section 727, 1141, 1228(a), 1228(b), or 1328(b) of this title does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt—

(2) for money, property, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit, to the extent obtained by--

(A) false pretenses, a false representation, or actual fraud, other than a statement respecting the debtor's or an insider . . .

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.

Senate Judiciary Committee Hearing on Student Loans and Act Introduced by Senators Durbin and Cornyn

August 8, 2021

by William Houston Brown, Adviser, Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education, Inc. The Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing on August 3, 2021, on student loans, and during the Committee hearing, Senator Durbin, Chair of the Committee, stated that he would be introducing an Act to amend student loan discharge provisions in the Bankruptcy Code. That Act was subsequently introduced by...

Members

Critical Case Comment

February 3, 2019

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee for the Middle District of TN (Nashville) Where a Chapter 13 plan provides that a mortgage payment will be paid “outside the plan,” the plan does not “provide for” the mortgage payment and, accordingly, the discharge under § 1328 is not applicable to the mortgage obligation. Dukes v. Suncoast Credit Union, 909...

Members

Serendipity, a Tribute to Judge Jack B. Schmetterer

March 14, 2021

By Mark S. Wheeler, Staff Attorney to M.O. Marshall, Standing Chapter 13 Trustee (Chicago, IL) (Used with expressed permission. Published February 2021 in the Northern District of Illinois Bankruptcy Court Liaison Committee Newsletter.) Despite appearing before the Senior Bankruptcy Judge for the Northern District of Illinois perhaps hundreds of times over the last 29 years, I was uncharacteristically nervous to...

William E. Heitkamp (44)

David G. Peake

December 17, 2023

At the end of this calendar year, after 44 years, the Southern District of Texas and the bankruptcy community will lose one of our standard bearers. William E. Heitkamp, “Bill” was appointed Chapter 13 Trustee in 1979. His appointment came shortly after the Bankruptcy Reform Act of 1978 became law.

Members

Critical Case Comment – 3002.1 and Reverse Mortgages

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

January 23, 2022

Requirements and remedies in Rule 3002.1 apply to reverse mortgages as well as conventional mortgages; while discharge of Chapter 13 plan does not discharge a mortgage obligation treated pursuant to § 1325(b)(5), the court may prohibit prospective use of a nondisclosed obligation as grounds for a default. (Waites) In re Legare-Doctor, 2021 WL 5712149 (Bankr. D. S.C. Dec. 1, 2021)...

Members

Of Tax Refunds, Exemptions, Setoffs, and Roman Gods

April 18, 2021

By Herbert L. Beskin, Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Western District of Virginia (Charlottesville) If you’re looking for a well-written and clear appellate opinion about a much-litigated topic, with a bit of ancient mythology thrown in for good measure, this HUD’s for you. The case is Wood v. U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development (In re Larry and...

Members

“Stripping” Residential Mortgages and the Effect of 11 U.S.C. § 1111(b) – Part 2 Eleven Eleven What?

July 24, 2021

By Lawrence R. Ahern, III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) Wonk Alert This Part 2 wraps up some suggestions about how the parties to residential mortgages may avoid or minimize problems in the structuring and administration of these loans, with a discussion of subsection 1111(b) of Bankruptcy Code.1 This discussion may seem arcane, as indeed many experienced Chapter 11 practitioners...

Members

From the Editor – Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

February 2, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Punitive damages reduced for FDCPA and RESPA violations. The mortgage servicer violated FDCPA, RESPA and the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act by treating account as delinquent after Chapter 13 debtor had cured arrears, brought account current and obtained discharge. The servicer mistakenly marked the Chapter 13 case as dismissed rather...

Members

What Does “Following” Mean?

Kara K. Gendron

April 2, 2023

Section in 109(g)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code bars a debtor from filing a new case for 180 days if the Debtor voluntarily dismisses a case “following” a motion for relief. Not surprisingly, courts are split on how they interpret the word “following” as used in § 109(g)(2). After all, the word “following” is not limited to one definition, or even...

Members

When is Enough, Enough? Pro Se Dismissed with Extended Prejudice (and Violates Bar)

Jeff LeForce

January 16, 2022

When do the facts justify a long bar to refiling over the 180-day period in § 109(g)? Sometimes it is Justice Stewart’s infamous words from Jacobellis v. Ohio, 378 U.S. 187 (1964)–“I know it when I see it.” Even so, a Trustee must provide evidence and authority to the Court for a long prejudice period. In In re Parson 2021...

Members