In re Oparaji

In re Oparaji, 2010 WL 5462456 (Bankr. S.D. Texas, December 29, 2010) (Isgur)

The doctrine of judicial estoppel precludes a creditor from asserting a proof of claim in a debtor’s second Chapter 13 case that is inconsistent from the claim it asserted in the debtor’s first Chapter 13 case.

Case Summary

Titus Oparaji filed his first bankruptcy petition in 2004. Wells Fargo filed a number of claims in the case (five in total), but after it filed the fourth claim in December 2008, the Court approved a modification of Oparaji’s . . .

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.

Keep Calm and Carry On – Observations Regarding CBRA

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

October 9, 2022

First, breathe deep and try to relax. The Antitrust, Commercial and Administrative House Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee, with minimal notice, set an oversight hearing for September 29, 2022. The subcommittee is charged to deal with matters relating to bankruptcy. The subject of the hearing was to be the “Oversight of the Bankruptcy Code, Part 2: Ensuring a Fresh...

Critical Case Comment – Playing the System – Good or Bad Thing??

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

October 8, 2023

Chapter 13 debtor that repeatedly fails to maintain payments to the mortgage servicer directly as provided in the original plan and in all amendments is not acting in good faith and has misled the court as to feasibility of the plan justifying dismissal of the case.

Members

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 – Pre-Confirmation Payments

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

June 26, 2022

Even though the Model Plan in the district provides that the applicable commitment period starts from confirmation, the debtor may not apply pre-confirmation payments toward payments made during the applicable commitment period but must apply those payments in addition to the applicable commitment period payments. (Applebaum) In re Batoha, 2022 WL 1310943 (Bankr. E.D. Mich. May 2, 2022) Case Summary...

Members

Pump the Brakes: Bad Faith Debtors Are Not Gaming the System (Part II)

January 27, 2019

By Kathryne M. Shaw1 Boleman Law Firm, P.C. (Virginia Beach, VA) Click here for Part 1 In Part I of this article, we reviewed In re Holman, in which the debtors violated their confirmation order and exhibited bad faith . . . It looks like you are not signed in or registered! This content is only available to members. Join...

Members

Surrender of Collateral in a Plan- What Is the Court to Do if the Debtor Doesn’t Follow Through?

June 2, 2019

By Tammy E. Stickley and Francis J. DiCesare, Staff Attorneys for Margaret A. Burks, Esq. Chapter 13 Standing Trustee (Cincinnati, OH) In a media age in which people expect to be told when “spoilers” are ahead, this summary needs no such warning. Courts have little patience for debtors who surrender collateral – especially real estate – then oppose the foreclosure...

Members

Ask Ms. Ps & Qs

Nancy B. Rapoport

February 18, 2024

This month, Prof. Rapoport looks at the question: What should happen when the Rule 2016 statement on compensation conflicts with the SOFA #16?

Members

A Salute to the Consumer Litigation Five Star General

Keith D. Slocum

April 2, 2023

Consumer law attorney, mentor and educator, Oliver Max Gardner III recently announced that he is retiring. His passion, diligent research and unmatched expertise has served as a north star in consumer law for so many of us. From building a community of like-minded enthusiasts through the renowned Bankruptcy Boot Camp and cultivating an army of consumer litigators to fiercely defending...

Mortgage Matters in Times of COVID-19

April 5, 2020

By Robert (Bob) Schuman, Owner/Managing Broker, Network Financial Group Is it 2008 again? For us in the mortgage industry, we woke up this week feeling as if during the night, we were transported back to 2008 when the mortgage industry basically collapsed. Then, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the FHA were the exceptions. As of March 25, 2020, like everything...

Members

From the IRS – Using Strong Password Is a Strong Defense Against Identity Thieves

December 15, 2019

Two things taxpayers can do to protect themselves from identity theft is to use strong passwords and keep those passwords secure. While many people use fingerprint or facial recognition technology to protect their devices, sometimes it’s still necessary to use a password. In recent years, cybersecurity experts’ recommendations on what constitutes a strong password has changed. With that in mind,...

In re Oparaji

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

Keep Calm and Carry On – Observations Regarding CBRA

Critical Case Comment – Playing the System – Good or Bad Thing??

William E. Heitkamp (44)

Critical Case Comment – Pre-Confirmation Payments

Pump the Brakes: Bad Faith Debtors Are Not Gaming the System (Part II)

Surrender of Collateral in a Plan- What Is the Court to Do if the Debtor Doesn’t Follow Through?

Ask Ms. Ps & Qs

A Salute to the Consumer Litigation Five Star General

Mortgage Matters in Times of COVID-19

From the IRS – Using Strong Password Is a Strong Defense Against Identity Thieves

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: