All posts in Chapter 13

Chapter 13 Plan Addendum Appears to be Moot According to the Court?

By | July 9, 2012 | Chapter 13, Court Clerk Information, Judges Corner | 1 Comment

Good morning,

Consumer Bankruptcy attorney’s are well aware of the Addendum, the local form attached to the Chapter 13 Plan. And as we all know, there have been several years of litigation regarding the form, much of it spearheaded and defended by the law firm of Borowitz and Clark.

Well please see below from the Court’s Web Page. The use of the Addendum now appears to be moot according to the Court.

F 3015-1.1.ADDENDUM
Superseded by new national Proof of Claim forms B10A, B10S, and B10S2 — see Proof of Claim Forms on website

Addendum to Chapter 13 Plan Concerning Debtors Who are Repaying Debt Secured by a Mortgage on Real Property or a Lien on Personal Property the Debtor Occupies as the Debtor’s Principal Residence (Optional)

David Brian Lally, Esq.
Law Office of David B. Lally

FYI, that is exactly what Judge Kaufman told me in court a couple of weeks ago. Although, she added that Debtors can still use the Real Property Addendum if they wish. Our office will definitely continue to attach it to all Chp. 13 Plans for Debtors who own real property. 

-RDM

Judge Neil Bason Hearing Times to Change

By | June 28, 2012 | Chapter 13, Judges Corner | 1 Comment

Judge Bason News:

Starting with the 8/30 Calendar, the confirmation hearings will begin at 9:00 a.m.

Aki Koyama

Amrane Cohen Has a Position Open for Staff Attorney

By | June 12, 2012 | Chapter 13, Firm Announcements | 1 Comment

Dear Colleagues!

The Chapter 13 Standing Trustee for Santa Ana (& Riverside cases for Judge Houle), Amrane Cohen, has a position open for a new Staff Attorney. If you are interested or you know someone that may be interested, he has indicated that:

you can send applications or cover letter to his e-mail address with a resume and your salary requirements.  His email address is: amrane@ch13ac.com

KEITH HIGGINBOTHAM
2012 cdcbaa President

Does a Chapter 13 Debtor have the Absolute Right to Separately Classify “Codebtor Consumer Claims”? We don’t know says the 9th Circuit BAP

By | June 10, 2012 | Case Briefs, Cases, Chapter 13 | 2 Comments

Meyer v. Renteria (In re Renteria), — B.R. — (9th Cir. BAP May, 2012)

Issue:   May a chapter 13 plan, that pays a “codebtor consumer debt” in full and other unsecured creditors 9%, be confirmed without considering whether the discrimination is reasonable?

Holding:   Yes, but only on these facts where the trustee conceded that the plan was filed in good faith.

Judge Richard Lee, Eastern District of California

Opinion by Markell, concurring opinions by Pappas and Dunn

The “majority” opinion said that it appears that there is an absolute right to separately classify “codebtor consumer claims” and pay that claim in full and other unsecured creditors a nominal amount.  The majority did not reach the ultimate issue because the trustee conceded that the plan was filed in good faith.  One concurring opinion said categorically there is no absolute right; the other said categorically there is an absolute right.

cdcbaa Program on Chapter 13 a Great Success

By | May 19, 2012 | Chapter 13, Programs | 1 Comment

Omid Moezzi, Staff Attorney to Chapter 13 Trustee Nancy Curry and Angela Gill, Staff Attorney to Chapter 13 Trustee Kathy Dockery put on a great show this morning at Southwestern Law School.  The cdcbaa program was entitled Getting Your Chapter 13 Plan Confirmed and Post-Confirmation Issues.

Judge Albert Tentative Ruling re Addendum to Chapter 13 Plan

By | May 18, 2012 | Chapter 13, Judges Corner | 11 Comments

May 16, 2012

Tentative Ruling:

This is the confirmation of the debtors’ Chapter 13 plan. The Bank of New York Mellon (“bank”) has filed an objection, primarily concerning the attachment of the optional Addendum promulgated by the Central District. The bank argues that the Addendum is superseded as inconsistent with revised FRBP 3002.1 which was adopted by the Supreme Court December 2011.

The bank’s argument is not persuasive on any of its points.

First, the bank argues that FRBP 3002.1(b) and (c) as amended is an Act of Congress. It is not, except insofar as it could be argued that 28 U.S.C. §2075, which requires that changed rules be submitted by the Supreme Court for Congressional review by May 1, becomes an “act of Congress” each year when Congress fails to respond (as here).

Second, it is equally true that no Local Rule can be enacted if it inconsistent with, or duplicative of, either an act of Congress or the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. See FRBP 9029. But the court is not persuaded that the Addendum is inconsistent or duplicative of the Rules or any of them. Rule 3002.1 (b) and (c) governs proofs of claim, and the notices required there under are to be given as supplements to the proof of claim. The court is not sure this is quite the same thing as monthly mortgage statements particularly when the plan calls for monthly statements.

Read more…

Applicable Commitment Period Appeal

By | May 18, 2012 | Appeals, Chapter 13 | No comments

Last Friday, May 11th, 2012, Nancy Clark of Borowitz & Clark and Beth Schneider of Rod Danielson’s Office argued the applicable commitment issue before the 9th circuit.  I’ve been told that the three panel judge stated on the record that they did not have much knowledge of bankruptcy law and both attorneys had to spend some time explaining how things work in chapter 13 bankruptcy.  Hopefully, we will have some clarity on this last major issue in the near future.  We have been waiting for about seven years since BAPCPA was enacted for the courts to tell us what the “applicable commitment period” actually means.  Keep your fingers crossed.

Aki Koyama

More Info on Pro Per Filings in the Central District

By | May 8, 2012 | Chapter 13, Chapter 7, Community | No comments

The 9th Circuit has prepared a nice overview on the pro per filings issues in the Central District.  You can access it here.  About a quarter of all filings in the Central District are pro per and, of that amount, 39% of the chapter 7s will be dismissed and 99% of the chapter 13s will fail to successfully complete the plan.

The chapter 7 number is a little strange since chapter 7s are rarely dismissed (I thought).  I assume the dismissal must be based on the failure of the debtor to appear at the meeting of creditors.  That tells me that the filing was solely to stop an eviction or foreclosure and give the debtor a little more time to move.   The filing was probably by a BPP or “notario” in the hispanic community.  A lot of the pro pers are not aware they filed.

As to chapter 13s, it’s a sad state of events to know that the paperwork is so complicated that virtually no one can do it themselves.  I assume most pro per chapter 13s are filed by people who are trying to save property they cannot afford and thus the failure from the start.  But conceptually, chapter 13s are not that complicated – its the paperwork that is difficult although Congress could help by making the basic rules a little more easy to understand and banks could help by doing something other than filing a mindless objection to the plan at the last minute, then sending an appearance attorney to the hearing.

cdcbaa Program: How to Get a Chapter 13 Case Confirmed and Post Confirmation Issues

By | May 3, 2012 | Chapter 13, Community, Programs | No comments

Central District Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys Association

How to Get a Chapter 13 Case Confirmed and Post Confirmation Issues

 May 19, 2012

 Speakers:

Omid Moezzi, Staff Attorney to Chapter 13 Trustee Nancy Curry

Angela Gill, Staff Attorney to Chapter 13 Trustee Kathy Dockery

 Where:  Southwestern Law School

Read more…

Bankruptcy Basics and Review Program

By | May 3, 2012 | Chapter 11, Chapter 13, Chapter 7, Community, Programs | 11 Comments

Hosted by University of West Los Angeles School of Law

Bankruptcy Basics and Review

MCLE Specialization Bankruptcy Credit (approved for 12 MCLE credits)

Professor M. Jonathan Hayes, Senior Adjunct Professor of Law UWLA and Certified Bankruptcy Specialist

James T. King, Certified Bankruptcy Specialist

June 1-2, 2012; 9:30 a.m – 4:30pm

This two day program will focus on Chapter 7, 11, and 13. The program is for attorneys who have some basic knowledge of bankruptcy and are interested in learning more.  Paralegals and staff are welcome.  The first day will focus on consumer bankruptcy, Chapter 7 and 13 and the second day will focus on Chapter 11, corporate and individual cases.  You can sign up for one day or both.

See the flyer here.

Hope to see you there!

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →