Critical Case Comment

By Henry E. Hildebrand, III, Chapter 13 Trustee (Nashville, TN)

There is no requirement to show a change in circumstance in order to modify a Chapter 13 plan pursuant to § 1329. Whaley v. Guillen (In re Guillen), 2020 WL 5015287 (11th Cir. Aug. 25, 2020) (Marcus)

Case Summary

Rachel Guillen filed a Chapter 13 petition in August of 2015. She disclosed two secured creditors: Central Mortgage Company holding a first mortgage and Wells Fargo, allegedly, holding a secured priority mortgage on the debtor’s home. Guillen, however, disputed the validity of the lien that Wells Fargo . . .

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.

Planning for Attorney Disability or Death

Pat E. Morgenstern-Clarren

November 26, 2023

Although this article was originally published in 2009, Judge Morgenstern-Clarren took a fresh look just this week. It is just as relevant today as the day she first wrote it

Members

From the Editor – Confirmation

March 8, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Equal monthly payments and attorney fees. The secured creditor objected to confirmation on basis that the plan improperly deferred its payments until debtor’s attorney fees were paid, and the District Court affirmed confirmation that delayed start of secured equal monthly payments for 21 months. The opinion examines three approaches to the issue: 1)...

Members

Avoidance Powers in Chapter 13 – Part 4 of 6

January 20, 2019

By John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Ohio, Western Division (Toledo, OH) Click here for Part 1 of 6 Click here for Part 2 of 6 Click here for Part 3 of 6

Members

How to Present an Effective Summary Judgment Motion

August 23, 2020

By Hon. Erik P. Kimball, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida (Used with permission - Originally Published by the Courthouse Beacon, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Florida August, 2020) Summary Judgment Applies In Contested Matters Bankruptcy Rule 7056 incorporates all of Federal Rule 56 for purposes of adversary proceedings, adjusting only the...

Members

Weighted Caseload: Why It Matters and How It Works and Doesn’t Work

Honorable Brian D. Lynch

December 31, 2023

“Currently, if a district’s weighted caseload is below one-thousand per the number of judges in that district . . . in all probability, recommend that the circuit not replace the judge.”

Members

Consumer Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2020 Introduced

December 13, 2020

By Hon. William Houston Brown, Adviser, Academy for Consumer Bankruptcy Education and Margaret A. Burks, Chapter 13 Trustee (Cincinnati, OH) Senator Elizabeth Warren (D. Mass.) and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerrold Nadler (D. N.Y.) have introduced the Consumer Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2020. Introduction of the Act is only the beginning of the legislative process, and no action toward enactment...

What the FICO? Reaffirming Doesn’t Help My Credit Score?

May 23, 2021

By The Honorable John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Judge, Northern District of Ohio (Toledo) Reaffirmation hearings during the pandemic have been difficult, at least for me. The economic risks for debtors are greater. There are uncertainties about the availability of credit, and the availability of suitable vehicles. Prices of used cars have gone up – with stimulus money pushing...

Members

Creditors’ Rights and Debtors’ Protections at the Intersection of Consumer Bankruptcy and UCC Article 9 – Part 3

September 13, 2020

By Lawrence R. Ahern III, Brown & Ahern (Nashville, TN) PART III – DELAYED PERFECTION OF SECURITY INTERESTS Introduction Current circumstances (a pandemic and dire economic conditions) portend an onslaught of bankruptcy filings. In the consumer bankruptcy field, trustees and debtors' counsel often are uncomfortable with the rules in Article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). In this space,...

Members

Reaffirmations Impose Impossible Demands on Bankruptcy Counsel

February 28, 2021

By Cathy Moran, Esq. (Redwood City, CA) When BAPCA gutted the ipso facto clause, reaffirmation was left as the only way a debtor could be assured of retaining his wheels. Car lenders took sides back then, then changed sides, on whether they would automatically repossess a vehicle when the debt was not reaffirmed. Some wanted the in terrorem effect of...

Members

Bankruptcy Protections Limited for Repeat Filers

January 13, 2019

By William H. Brown, Academy Editor & Advisor The First Circuit held that under § 362(c)(3)(A), upon the repeat filing by Chapter 7, 11 or 13 debtors within one year of dismissal of a prior pending case, the automatic stay terminates entirely on the 30th day after filing of the subsequent case as to the debtor, property of the debtor...

Members