Skip to main content

§ 526

Hanawahine, In re

Ruling
Business that the debtors found online was ordered to disgorge the payment it received from the debtors for not providing the services it promised to provide. (Bankr. D. Haw.)
Issue(s)
Restrictions on Debtor Relief Agencies; Restricted Actions; Failure to Provide Promised Service.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on September 21, 2017 , LexisNexis #1017-105

Dove v. McOmber (In re Dove)

Ruling
Debtor's attorney's misrepresentation that debt to former spouse would be discharged was grounds for emotional distress damages.
Issue(s)
Should debtor be awarded damages for attorney's misrepresentation that debt to former spouse would be discharged in debtor's chapter 7 case?

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Dove v. McOmber (In re Dove) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 17, 2016 , LexisNexis #0616-015

Robbins v. Barbour (In re Futreal)

Ruling
Attorneys’ fees for services that did not have reasonable value or were not performed ordereddisgorged. (Bankr. W.D. Va.)
Issue(s)
Restrictions on Debtor Relief Agencies.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Robbins v. Barbour (In re Futreal) Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 05, 2016 , LexisNexis #1216-045

In re Thurston

Ruling
Debtor's attorney suspended from practice for two years for unauthorized filing of installment fee application.
Issue(s)
Should debtor's attorney be sanctioned for electronic filing of application for installment payments of filing fee that was not authorized by debtor?

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 01, 2015 , LexisNexis #0615-020

In re Howard

Ruling
Debtor's attorneys sanctioned for filing of false application to pay filing fees in installments without debtor's knowledge.
Issue(s)
Should debtor's attorney be sanctioned for filing an application to pay the filing fee in installments with the consent of debtor?

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on May 01, 2015 , LexisNexis #0615-021

In re LaTanya

Ruling
Attorney acting as a "debt relief agency" ordered to disgorge fees collected under agreement that did not comply with §528(a)(1)(B).
Issue(s)
Was attorney a "debt relief agency" and required to disgorge fees due to failure of retainer agreements to comply with § 528(a)(1)(B) by identifying the terms of payment?

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on July 23, 2014 , LexisNexis #0814-091

In re Valdez

Ruling
Debt relief agency ordered to disgorge fees and enjoined from operating in district until demonstrating compliance with Bankruptcy Code.
Procedural posture

Debtor filed a petition under chapter 13 of the Bankruptcy Code, and the court issued an order requiring the debtor to show cause why he should not be sanctioned for filing his bankruptcy petition in bad faith. After the debtor testified at the hearing, the court issued an order to a business that gave the debtor advice, which required the business to show cause why it should it should not be sanctioned.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Valdez 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 23, 2011 , LexisNexis #0911-088

In re Fahey

Ruling
Attorney enjoined from providing bankruptcy assistance due to pattern of inadequate representation.
Procedural posture

The court addressed whether disciplinary action should be taken against a bankruptcy attorney under 11 U.S.C.S. § 526 and other related authority.

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

Consumer opinion summary, case decided on September 01, 2009 , LexisNexis #1009-016

Hersh v. United States

Ruling
Section 526(a)(4) prohibits only counseling that would lead to abuse of bankruptcy system and is not facially unconstitutional.
Procedural posture

The district court for the Northern District of Texas held that 11 U.S.C.S. § 526(a)(4) was facially unconstitutional. Defendant, the United States, appealed this ruling. The district court also held that attorneys qualified a debt relief agencies under 11 U.S.C.S. § 101(12A), that 11 U.S.C.S. § 527(b) did not violate the First Amendment. Plaintiff, a bankruptcy attorney, cross-appealed these rulings.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Hersh v. United States Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Court :
Judge or Jurisdiction information not available
Consumer opinion summary, case decided on December 18, 2008 , LexisNexis #0209-011

Milavetz Gallop & Milavetz PA v. United States

Ruling
BAPCPA's 526(a)(4) restrictions on "debt relief agencies" unconstitutional as applied to attorneys meeting that definition.
Procedural posture

Appellants, a law firm, a firm president, a firm attorney and two clients, appealed from the District Court for the District of Minnesota which granted summary judgment in favor of appellee United States. Appellants claimed that the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA), 11 U.S.C.S. §§ 526(a)(4), 528(a)(4), (b)(2), did not apply to attorneys and law firms and was unconstitutional as applied to attorneys.

ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Milavetz Gallop & Milavetz PA v. United States Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Court :
Judge or Jurisdiction information not available
Commercial opinion summary, case decided on September 04, 2008 , LexisNexis #0908-119