Skip to main content

§ 524(c)(1)

In re Lucious

Ruling
Creditor could not extend time to file reaffirmation agreement entered into after debtor's discharge.
Procedural posture

In debtors' chapter 7 case, the court held a hearing on a creditor's Motion to Extend Time to File a Reaffirmation Agreement. Its motion was premised on the terms of Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4008(a) and general principles of equity.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Lucious Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on August 01, 2012 , LexisNexis #0912-013

In re Nichols

Ruling
Creditor could not seek to vacate discharge in order to file a post-discharge reaffirmation agreement.
Procedural posture

In a chapter 7 bankruptcy, a creditor moved to reopen the case and set aside the discharge in order to file a reaffirmation agreement. The debtors filed a response consenting to the motion. The reaffirmation agreement was signed after the discharge was entered. The motion to reopen was filed more than a month after the deadline to file reaffirmation agreements and almost a month after the discharge was entered.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Nichols Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on November 29, 2010 , LexisNexis #1210-085

In re Young

Ruling
Court lacked power to approve reaffirmation agreement once discharge was entered.
Procedural posture

A debtor filed a motion to reopen a chapter 7 bankruptcy case to file a reaffirmation agreement with a creditor.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Young Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on November 29, 2007 , LexisNexis #1207-118

In re Cottrill

Ruling
Debtor could not reaffirm debts post-discharge where no action had been taken within 30 days of creditors'meeting.
Procedural posture

The debtors filed for relief under chapter 7 and they received a chapter 7 discharge in December, 2006. In February, 2007, the debtors filed reaffirmation agreements, with respect to two vehicles owned by the debtors and financed by the creditors, to waive the requirements of 11 U.S.C. § 524(c)(1). The court denied the motions at a hearing and set forth a memorandum opinion memorializing its ruling.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Cottrill Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

opinion summary, case decided on June 19, 2007 , LexisNexis #0707-075