Abstract: Responsible societies reckon with the pernicious and ugly chapters in their histories. Wherever we look around, there exist ever-present reminders of how we failed as a society in permitting the enslavement of millions of black men, women, and children in the first century of this nation’s history. No corner of society remains unstained. As such, it is incumbent on institutions to confront their involvement in this horrific past so as to fully comprehend the kaleidoscopic nature of institutional complicity in legitimating and entrenching slavery.

Summary: Ms. Calloway divorced Mr. Bowles and shortly before a final judgment was entered in their equitable distribution proceeding, she filed Chapter 13. Just prior to Ms. Calloway’s bankruptcy filing, the state court judge circulated a preliminary ruling to the parties via email, stating that he believed an unequal distribution of the marital assets in favor of Mr. Bowles would be equitable and that Ms.

Summary: The Prices, who are above median income debtors, but nonetheless have negative projected disposable monthly and no non-exempt assets, proposed an estimated 15% dividend to the class of dischargeable general unsecured creditors, which totaled $11,728.38.  They also proposed to separately classify the  $10,463.48 claim by Navient for non-dischargeable student loans.  The Chapter 13 Trustee supported confirmation, but the Bankruptcy Administrator filed a limited objection to such treatment. The bankruptcy court first addressed whether the prohibition in&n

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.