§ 524

In re Stillwell

A bankruptcy debtor sought to retain her vehicle even though the debtor's available income was insufficient to make payments on the debt secured by the vehicle. The debtor sought approval of a reaffirmation agreement with the secured creditor under 11 U.S.C. § 524(m)(1).
Ruling: 
Reaffirmation agreement approved where debtor failed to show enforcement would cause undue hardship.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Stillwell. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Tummel & Carroll v. Quinlivan

On remand from the Fifth Circuit, the court considered whether an individual acted as chapter 7 debtor's agent in negotiating a contract with a judgment creditor and, if so, did the agent's actions amount to conduct that made the debt owed to the creditor by debtor nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(A).
Ruling: 
Debt for legal services obtained by debtor's agent through false representations was dischargeable.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Tummel & Carroll v. Quinlivan. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Smith v. Radoff (In re Smith)

Plaintiff chapter 7 debtor filed an adversary proceeding against defendants, a judgment creditor, the creditor's successor in interest, the successor's attorney, the attorney's law firm, a receiver appointed by a state court, and others, after the receiver withdrew money from his bank account. The debtor, the receiver, and the law firm all filed summary judgment motions. The attorney and law firm also filed an emergency motion for a continuance.
Ruling: 
Creditor's unsecured judgment was voided by entry of discharge and could not be basis for recovery of debtor's property.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Smith v. Radoff (In re Smith). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Wofford v. Scott (In re Scott)

Plaintiff was a co-owner of certain property with defendant debtor. Plaintiff filed an adversary proceeding to impose an equitable lien on the property at issue. This proceeding was resolved. However, the debtor filed a counterclaim alleging that plaintiff violated the discharge injunction as set forth in 11 U.S.C. § 524(a)(2). Plaintiff moved for summary judgment on his claim and moved to dismiss the counterclaim.
Ruling: 
In rem action to impose equitable lien on property did not violate discharge injunction.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Wofford v. Scott (In re Scott). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

White v. Chance Indus. (In re Chance Indus.)

Chapter 11 debtors and their principal moved to enjoin state court lawsuits brought by plaintiffs, a child hurt by one of debtors'amusement rides, and his parents, and to find plaintiffs in contempt for violation of the confirmation order and the discharge injunction. Plaintiffs and intervenor, the buyer of the amusement ride, filed an adversary complaint against debtors, seeking a determination of the dischargeability of the state court claims.
Ruling: 
Post-confirmation personal injury claim by plaintiff with no pre-petition relationship with debtor was not discharged by confirmation order.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of White v. Chance Indus. (In re Chance Indus.). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Laynas

The court reviewed debtor's reaffirmation agreement under 11 U.S.C. § 524(c)(2), as amended by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ("BAPCPA"), Pub. L. No. 109-8, 119 Stat. 23 (2005), and under new section 524(k) and (m) of the BAPCPA. A creditor that initially filed a motion for relief from automatic stay, seeking to repossess debtor's car under state law, entered a signed reaffirmation agreement between it and debtor.
Ruling: 
Reaffirmation agreement was not approved since parties did not appear at hearing to rebut presumption of undue hardship or make clear that debtor could fulfill obligation.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Laynas. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Donald

At a discharge hearing pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 524(d), the court had to consider whether to approve a reaffirmation agreement between the chapter 7 debtors and a secured creditor under section 524(c)(6)(A) as being in the best interest of the debtors. The debtors argued that they could retain their car by making their payments even if the court disapproved the reaffirmation agreement, thereby making it unenforceable.
Ruling: 
Reaffirmation agreement was approved since it was in best interest of debtors and was required for debtors to retain car.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Donald. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

OneBeacon Amer. Ins. Co. v. A.P.I. Inc.

Appellant insurer challenged an order of the bankruptcy court, which confirmed a plan of reorganization of appellee debtor, a distributor of insulation that contained asbestos.
Ruling: 
Plan containing trust succeeding to debtor's rights in asbestos insurance policies confirmed.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of OneBeacon Amer. Ins. Co. v. A.P.I. Inc.. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Reardon

Chapter 11 debtor filed a motion seeking approval of a reaffirmation agreement, which was substantially in the form issued by the Director of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts to implement the requirements of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005, Pub. L. No. 109-8. ("BAPCPA"). The form also complied with the court's Administrative Order 4008-1 (AO 4008-1).
Ruling: 
Court did not approve reaffirmation agreement because it did not contain any identification of identity of creditor.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Reardon. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Barlas

A bankruptcy debtor was granted a discharge subject to a determination of the nondischargeability of a potential debt to a creditor who had a lawsuit pending in which the debtor was a named defendant prior to her bankruptcy. The debtor moved for sanctions against the creditor's counsel for violating the bankruptcy stay by serving the debtor with a deposition subpoena in the lawsuit.
Ruling: 
Court deemed that creditor's counsel did not violate discharge injunction by serving debtor with deposition subpoena since creditor was entitled to depose debtor as witness and information requested was relevant to dischargeability issues.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Barlas. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Pages

Subscribe to § 524