In re Lewis, No. 12-10033, 2012 WL 1682587 (Bankr. N.D. Ohio May 14, 2012) (Harris)

Attorney violated Bankruptcy Rule 9011 by scheduling mortgage arrearage as zero when attorney represented debtor in prior Chapter 7 case and knew that there was an arrearage and a foreclosure sale. Counsel did not conduct reasonable inquiry into representation in schedules. Voluntary dismissal of case without approval of debtor was not safe harbor withdrawal of offending documents for Rule 9011 purposes. Attorney ordered to pay $200 sanction to clerk of court.

No Author Biography has been linked to this Article.

Evidentiary Issues Arising from Attempts to Prove Alleged “Facts” Stated in The Monster Mash

October 27, 2019

By Alexander Schmidt1, Law Clerk, and The Honorable John P. Gustafson, United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Toledo) You have never heard – or seen – the Monster Mash. What have you heard, is a song ABOUT the Monster Mash. Let that sink in for a minute. Inevitably, that leads to the obvious question: What facts...

Members

Critical Case Comment – Ignoring 3002.1 Will Cost You

Henry E. Hildebrand, III

February 5, 2023

Mortgagee’s failure to disclose payment changes resulting from escrow adjustments and interest rate modifications compels the Court to order mortgagee to credit all undisclosed increases and subject it to sanctions, including attorney’s fees. (Somers) In re Kinderknecht, 2023 WL 320984 (Bankr. D. Kan. January 19, 2023) Case Summary Kyle and Chasity Kinderknecht filed a Chapter 13 petition in December of...

Members

Max’s Knowledge Nugget

Max Gardner

November 13, 2022

Question: May a servicer charge to generate a payoff quote? Answer: 1026.36(c)(3) Payoff statements. In connection with a consumer credit transaction secured by a consumer's dwelling, a creditor, assignee or servicer, as applicable, must provide an accurate statement of the total outstanding balance that would be required to pay the consumer's obligation in full as of a specified date. The...

Members

A Guide to the Small Business Reorganization Act of 2019 – Revised June 2022

Paul W. Bonapfel

November 9, 2022

Click here to see PDF – SBRA Guide June 2022 Compilation FINAL Click here to see PDF – SBRA May-June Supplement Final

First Principles for First Meetings

October 11, 2020

By Cathy Moran, Esq. (Redwood City, CA) Once again, I sat in a 341 meeting where the trustee’s representative purported to deliver vital information to the assembled debtors. She had a captive audience of anxious listeners. She had ostensible power of life and death over their financial future. They needed to know what she had to say. But as communication,...

Members

Sua Sponte Sanctions Held to Higher Standard

Cathy Moran

January 14, 2024

9th Cir. BAP erected high bar for sanctions. And, interestingly, at the heart of the BAP’s decision was the very fact that BAP decisions are not binding.

Members

Is Nunc Pro Tunc Really Sunk?

December 20, 2020

By James M. Davis, Staff Attorney to Chapter 13 Standing Trustee Henry E. Hildebrand, III (Nashville, TN) Bankruptcy Courts take determinations from the Supreme Court seriously. And rightfully so. But sometimes, some bankruptcy courts are guilty of reading too much into the Court’s statements. The latest example is the soul searching around “nunc pro tunc” (“now for then”) orders. Earlier...

Members

From the Editor – Discharge Injunction

May 31, 2020

By The Honorable William Houston Brown (Retired) Application of Taggart to lien avoidance. When the Chapter 13 confirmed plan bifurcated the secured creditor’s claim and the secured portion had been paid in full with interest, the completion of payments voided any lien, and the creditor violated the discharge injunction by commencing foreclosure. The Panel found the plan’s language, although “inartful,”...

Members

From the Editor

April 7, 2019

By Wm. Houston Brown, United States Bankruptcy Judge (Retired) Attorney Fees - Chapter 13 debtor’s attorney not entitled to recovery under § 330 of fees that were incurred in defending prior attorneys’ sanctions motion. The debtor’s prior attorneys had sought to impose sanctions on the current attorney, and that attorney successfully defended against sanctions. However, the fees incurred by the...

Members

Meet a New Trustee

The Academy

December 19, 2021

One of our very newest trustees is very familiar to many of us. After serving ten years as Chief of Staff (a/k/a Staff Attorney) to Martha Bronitsky, on August 1, 2021, Nima Ghazvini was appointed Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for the Districts of Hawaii, Guam, and Northern Mariana Islands. What you may not know is that Ghazvini was born in...