All posts in Chapter 7

Useful Information on Reaffirmation

By | October 23, 2012 | Chapter 7 | 1 Comment

Hi, all,

I have created a handout that we provide our volunteers when they counsel pro se debtors before reaffirmation hearings. I am attaching it for your information. In addition, I am attaching an article about reaffirmation that Maggie Bordeaux wrote for Los Angeles Lawyer Magazine.

These two attachments provide a good overview of the reaffirmation process, and how a client may be able to keep a car by going through the reaffirmation process without actually reaffirming the debt.

Thanks,
Christian

Christian Cooper

Staff Attorney

Consumer Law Project & Debtor Assistance Project

Public Counsel Logo    Public Counsel

610 S. Ardmore Ave. | Los Angeles, CA  90005

(213) 637-3825  |  fax (213) 385-9089

   ccooper@publiccounsel.org | publiccounsel.org

Instructional Packet from Public Counsel: How to File a Motion to Reopen (to File your Financial Management Certificate)

By | October 23, 2012 | Chapter 7 | 1 Comment

Dear Colleagues!

Please find attached a copy of Instructions on How to File a Motion to Reopen (to File your Financial Management Certificate) for those Ch7 cases that accidentally get closed without a discharge. This is courtesy of our friends at Public Counsel.

Thanx Maggie & Christian!!

KEITH HIGGINBOTHAM
2012 cdcbaa President

9th Circuit BAP Rules that Bankruptcy Court may Consider Postpetition Events as Part of the Totality of the Circumstances

By | September 16, 2012 | Abuse - Sec 707, Case Briefs, Cases | 1 Comment

In re Ng may be accessed here.  The Debtor’s income increased after he filed.  The BAP says that the bankruptcy court may condsider that as part of the totality of the circumstances when deciding whether to dismiss a chapter 7 under section 707(b)(3).  By the way, the lower court also ruled that a debtor may deduct mortgage payments on the means test, even if he intends to surrender or abandon the home.  Since that ruling was irrelevant, the BAP did not discuss it.

Celebrity BK News — Olympics and NFL Edition

By | August 5, 2012 | Chapter 13, Chapter 7, Current Events | No comments

Olympic Gymnast and 2 Gold Medal (and counting!) winner Gabby Douglas’ mom filed Chapter 13 earlier this year.  TMZ explains how her plan payments will be divvied up.

Read more here. 

Retired NFL player Warren Saap’s Chapter 7 Trustee is selling his Nike Air Jordans collection — 240 pairs!

Read more here. 

Can a Lawyer Give Advice to a Client to Incur Prepetition Debt?

By | July 28, 2012 | Chapter 7 | No comments

Tip of the hat to Mr. Dennis McGoldrick who pointed me to Justice Sotomayor’s footnote 6 in during a wonderful class session.

Dennis McGoldrick

Thus, advice to refinance a mortgage or purchase a reliable car prior to filing because doing so will reduce the debtor’s interest rates or improve his ability to repay is not prohibited, as the promise of enhanced financial prospects, rather than the anticipated filing, is the impelling cause, so getting the right  law services from the Noonan law firm, that have many experience in these cases, from many years working in this field, since people always have different law issues and try to look the best advice for this, and sometimes is difficult to find quality services and that’s why having options like this always useful, using services like the ask 4 sam nyc lawyer that is really useful on this. Advice to incur additional debt to buy groceries, pay medical bills, or make other purchases “reasonably necessary for the support or maintenance of the debtor or a dependent of the debtor,” §523(a)(2)(C)(ii)(II), is similarly permissible.  Milavetz, Gallop & Milavetz, P. A. v. United States, 559 U.S. 229 (2010)

Public Notice re Santa Ana Case Assignment to Judge Clarkson

By | July 12, 2012 | Chapter 13, Chapter 7, Court Clerk Information, Judges Corner | 4 Comments

Public Notice 12-001 attached.

Judge Scott C. Clarkson recently began receiving a portion of the new chapter 7 and chapter 11 bankruptcy cases filed at the Santa Ana Division. Judge Clarkson will also continue to receive new cases filed at the Riverside Division.

Hearings: To schedule matters on Judge Clarkson’s Santa Ana Division calendar, please refer to Judge Clarkson’s self-calendaring instructions on the Court’s website at www.cacb.uscourts.gov, or call 714-338-5378.

Unless otherwise directed by the Court, parties appearing before Judge Clarkson for Santa Ana Division cases assigned to him are to appear at the Santa Ana Division, Courtroom 5C. Hearings for Judge Clarkson’s Santa Ana Division cases should be noticed for his Santa Ana Division Courtroom at 411 West Fourth Street, Courtroom 5C, Santa Ana, CA 92701.

Filing Papers/Judge’s Copies: Papers filed on Santa Ana Division cases assigned to Judge Clarkson must be filed either electronically or, for those not registered to use CM/ECF, at the Intake Section of the Santa Ana Division. Judge’s copies of these documents must be mailed to 411 West Fourth Street, Suite 5113, Santa Ana, CA 92701, or placed in the judge’s copy bin for Judge Clarkson outside of Suite 5113.

For procedures and information regarding Santa Ana Division cases assigned to Judge Clarkson, please consult the Court’s website www.cacb.uscourts.gov under Information > Judges’ Procedures/Information.

KATHLEEN J. CAMPBELL
CLERK OF COURT

New Opinion by Judge Neil Bason on In Rem Relief

By | July 6, 2012 | Chapter 7, Judges Corner | 1 Comment

From the findings of fact:

“Based on the foregoing, this case is consistent with the pattern in so-called “hijacked” or “dumping” cases — i.e., cases in which a transferor of property, acting without the debtor’s participation or acquiescence, seeks to implicate the automatic stay for the transferor’s own benefit by purporting to transfer property into a random bankruptcy estate, or by back-dating or falsifying a grant deed to make it appear that such a transfer has occurred.”

The holding:

“Based on the foregoing facts, although it is not appropriate to find that Debtor participated in the scheme, it is appropriate to grant relief of the type set forth in 11 U.S.C. §362(d)(4) (“in rem” relief), …”

As they say, read the whole thing.

Hale Antico

You can access the opinion here.

Student Loan Victory

By | July 2, 2012 | Chapter 7 | 1 Comment

Last week I had my very first trial and we won, discharging student loans!
http://www.prweb.com/releases/2012/6/prweb9652894.htm

— Christine A. Wilton, Esq. Law Office of Christine A. Wilton

Can’t Strip Seconds in Chapter 7, No Way, No How

By | June 11, 2012 | Chapter 7 | 2 Comments

Ran into a friend of mine at a party over the weekend who does appearances at chapter 7 341’s.  He said he’s appearing on bunches of cases for lawyers none of us have ever heard of, i.e., “newbys.”  He said every day he gets a few clients that think their unsecured seconds are going to be stripped in the chapter 7.  Peter Lively and Jim King I know are trying to find a case that they can try to strip the second, arguing that Dewsnup doesn’t apply to completely unsecured liens.  I believe a case in Florida recently went that direction.   But it hasn’t happened yet here.

The Homestead Exemption and Substance Abuse

By | May 12, 2012 | Cases, Chapter 7 | 1 Comment

An odd couple you say?  The skit put on at the Inns of Court meeting last week made me want to have another beer, then retire.  There were three would-be clients who had three issues that I thought I knew (one I actually did).  The poor lawyer, 40 years experience he kept saying, gave the wrong advice three times, started tipping the bottle and received advice from the state bar – very well done.

Client one had just sold their home.  They had $65,000 proceeds in the bank.  “That money’s safe if I file chapter 7 now – right?”  “No doubt about it, I’ve been doing this for 40 years.”  Wrong.  That exemption applies only if the debtor has actually filed a Declaration of Homestead prepetition.  Gulp.

Client two had just sold their home.  They had $65,000 proceeds in the bank.  “That money’s safe if I file chapter 7 now – right?”  “No doubt about it, I’ve been doing this for 40 years.”  Wrong.  That exemption applies only if the debtor actually reinvests the proceeds in a new home within six months from the sale of the first.  The trustee can hold up the estate closing and wait for the reinvestment.  No reinvestment, the proceeds magically become not exempt at the end of the six months.  (I knew that one).

Client three still owned the home.  They wanted to file chapter 7, sell the home and use the $175,000 proceeds for retirement.  “We can do that – right?”  “No doubt about it, I’ve been doing this for 40 years.”  Wrong – sort of.  A secured creditor got relief from stay during the case and foreclosed.  The debtors got the $175,000 from the sale.  They did not reinvest it.  At the end of the six months, the trustee was there with his hand out.  The exemption applies again only if the debtor reinvests within six months.  This is actually a new 9th Circuit case, In re Jacobson.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →