Abstract:
Previous data collected during the 2007 meltdown of the subprime mortgage market showed that African Americans were approximately twice as likely to file chapter 13 bankruptcy than persons of other races, a significant policy issue given the generally less generous rules in chapter 13. We first update and replicate these findings with new data collected during 2013 2014 as the housing market recovered.
Summary:
Mr. Myrick brought suit against Equifax under the FCRA for willfully failing to verify the discharge of a debt in his Chapter 7 bankruptcy. In light of Daughterty v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, the district court reconsidered its
Abstract:
The discharge injunction, which allows former debtors to be free from any efforts to collect former debt, is a primary feature of bankruptcy law in the United States. When creditors have systemically violated debtors’ discharge injunctions, some debtors have attempted to challenge those creditors through a class action lawsuit in bankruptcy court. However, the pervasiveness of class-waiving arbitration clauses likely prevents those debtors from disputing discharge injunction violations outside of binding, individual arbitration.
Abstract:
The debtor-creditor relationship has always been intertwined with notions of morality. Failing to pay one’s financial obligations has traditionally been met with social opprobrium, internal shame, and external stigma. This dynamic did not change with the advent of American bankruptcy law. Indeed, for much of the twentieth-century, scholars have studied and debated whether the stigma associated with filing for bankruptcy has declined over the years, particularly in the 1980s and 1990s when the number of consumer bankruptcy filings increased dramatically.
Summary:
Ms. Hamilton-Conversano filed Chapter 7 without her husband. Other than the couple’s secured debts, Mr. Conversano had no debts of his own and Mrs. Hamilton-Conversano had one American Express card, with a balance of $46,669.52, which they had jointly used to pay for all household expenses.
In completing her Means Test, Ms. Hamilton-Conversant took a “marital adjustment” to her husband’s contribution to her Current Monthly Income including $417.86, for the full monthly cost of their child’s private school.
Summary:
On appeal from the bankruptcy court decision in Baum v. Baum, the district court reviewed whether debts between separated spouse are discharged under 11 U.S.C.
Summary:
Ms. Hector, a realtor with income subject to fluctuation dependent on sales, filed Chapter 7, but did not include her Domestic Partner in her household size nor any income contribution, as their finances and expenses were neither commingled nor shared. Ms. Hector did not assist her Domestic Partner with housing expenses, but did pay all for all groceries and cleaning supplies for both. As such, Ms. Hector claimed deductions for housing and utility expenses on the Means Test.
Law Review: Taylor, Aaron & Sheffner, Daniel - Oh, What a Relief It (Sometimes) Is: An Analysis of Chapter 7 Bankruptcy Petitions to Discharge Student Loans
Abstract:
Conventional wisdom dictates that it is all-but-impossible to discharge student loans in bankruptcy. This contention, however, misstates the fact that bankruptcy discharge of student loans is possible—and it happens.
Summary:
Mr. Matusak’s plan provided, obviously among things, that he was required to produce verified updated Schedules of income and expenses during the 36 months Applicable Commitment Period of his plan whenever such were requested by the Chapter 13 Trustee or Ms. Brown, his ex-wife and a creditor. Based on that financial information, Ms. Brown filed a motion to modify Mr. Matusak’s plan in November 2016, seeking both an increase in the monthly payment and an extension of the plan from 36 to 60 months.
Prior to the hearing on the Motion to Modify
Summary:
In determining whether 11 U.S.C. § 707(b) was applicable, the bankruptcy court held that despite the debtors having thirteen consumer debts totaling $296,775.43 and eight business debts totaling $294,595.56, “[b]ecause of how easily a mortgage can skew the claims in favor of consumer debt” the debt secured by real property should be excluded from this consideration. In re Jones, 2009 WL 102442, *1 (Bankr. E.D.N.C. Jan. 12, 2009) (citing In re Booth, 858 F.2d 1051, 1054 (5th Cir. 1998)).