Southern District

Batten v. Cardwell (In re Batten)

Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 1009(a), movant debtors sought to amend the schedules in their chapter 7 case to reflect a tort claim that arose in the same month that they received a discharge.
Ruling: 
Post-confirmation, post-conversion tort claim was not property of the estate.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Batten v. Cardwell (In re Batten). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Southeast Landco LLC v. 150 Beachview Holdings LLC

Plaintiff brought an action against defendant, an owner of a leasehold, alleging a breach of a real estate contract as a result of a foreclosure sale of the owner's leasehold. The owner filed a motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). Plaintiff has asserted federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1334 as a matter related to a bankruptcy proceeding of a non-defaulting interest holder.
Ruling: 
Dispute between nondebtors over rights under rejected lease was not related to bankruptcy.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Southeast Landco LLC v. 150 Beachview Holdings LLC. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Attorneys at Law & Debt Relief Agencies

Plaintiff, a regional bankruptcy trustee, appealed a standing order issued by a bankruptcy judge that interpreted provisions of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 ("BAPCPA") that defined and regulated "debt relief agencies." Intervening interested parties were four attorneys comprising a professional corporation with a significant bankruptcy practice.
Ruling: 
Trustee lacked standing to contest bankruptcy court's blanket ruling that attorneys are not "debt relief agencies"as defined under BAPCPA.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Attorneys at Law & Debt Relief Agencies. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Baxter v. Johnson (In re Johnson)

Movant chapter 13 trustee objected to the confirmation of two chapter 13 cases. Respondents were debtors in each of the cases. In addition, movant creditor objected to the plan filed by debtors in one of the cases for substantially similar reasons.
Ruling: 
Objections to confirmation were sustained and cases were continued for debtors to modify their chapter 13 plans.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Baxter v. Johnson (In re Johnson). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Whitaker v. Baxter (In re Whitaker)

Debtors who filed a second chapter 13 petition within a one year period moved to reinstate the automatic stay of pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 362(c)(3)(B) or (c)(4)(B) as amended following the effective date of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. The bankruptcy court considered whether such relief was available, or whether the application of 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) relief was warranted.
Ruling: 
Court reinstated automatic stay for second filing based on its equitable powers to prevent abuse of process since debtors had acted in good faith and creditors had not objected to stay reinstatement.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Whitaker v. Baxter (In re Whitaker). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Baxter v. Lewis (In re Lewis)

Movant trustee sought dismissal of the petitions filed by respondent debtors, under chapter 13, based solely on 11 U.S.C. § 1328(f). The trustees contended that because the debtors were not eligible to receive a discharge upon the completion of any confirmed plan, the debtors were ineligible for chapter 13 relief.
Ruling: 
Motion to dismiss the debtors'chapter 13 cases was denied since debtors qualified for plan confirmation and their inability to receive a discharge of their cases under section 1328(f)(1) did not establish a bad faith filing.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of Baxter v. Lewis (In re Lewis). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

DaimlerChrysler Fin. Serv. Ams. LLC v. Brown (In re Brown)

Three debtors purchased vehicles for personal use within 910 days before filing a chapter 13 bankruptcy petition. Creditors filed objections to confirmation based on 11 U.S.C. § 1325 contending that they, as secured creditors, must be paid the present value of their claims and that the debtors'plan did not comply.
Ruling: 
Debtors were directed to modify their plans since the creditors'claims on debtors'personal vehicles were deemed allowed secured claims to be paid at their present value.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of DaimlerChrysler Fin. Serv. Ams. LLC v. Brown (In re Brown). Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

In re Carver

In their chapter 13 plan, the debtors listed the creditor that financed their vehicle as having a fully secured allowed claim for $15,000 and proposed to pay the creditor in monthly installments of $250 without interest. The debtors did not dispute that they purchased the vehicle during the 910-day period prior to filing their petition and that they purchased it for personal use. The creditor filed an objection to confirmation of the plan.
Ruling: 
Court interpreted new section 1325(a)(9) to provide that claims under a chapter 13 plan involving a vehicle purchased within the 910-day period prior to filing must receive the greater of either the claim's full amount without interest or the amount the creditor would have received if the claim were bifurcated between secured and unsecured portions and crammed down.
ABI Membership is required to access the full summary of In re Carver. Please sign in if you are already an ABI member, or otherwise you may Become an ABI Member

Pages

Subscribe to Southern District