Bankruptcy Law Commons^™

Overcoming The Presumption Of The Deceitful Debtor, Rebecca Rhym

Georgia State University Law Review

Congress codified presumed consumer debtor abuse into the Bankruptcy Code with the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005. Since then, distrust of low- and middle-class debtors has permeated the legal system, evidenced most visibly by how easily legislators are swayed by creditor lobbyists’ rhetoric. This distrust has also reached our courts, where judges invoke the doctrine of judicial estoppel to bar debtor-plaintiffs from pursuing tort claims undisclosed in bankruptcy petitions. Instead of addressing societal problems underlying the high number of bankruptcy filings, like financial literacy and predatory lending, this Note argues that lawmakers and courts are perpetuating …

The Approval Of Retirement Contributions In Chapter 13 Payment Plans, Jennifer Hepner

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

In the United States, employees often contribute a portion of their annual income to their 401(k) retirement plans. These contributions may fluctuate based on age, income, or additional contributions by employers. At the same time, chapter 13 debtors are often required to pay at least a portion of what is owed to creditors as part of their court-approved payment plans. A court will only approve a debtor's chapter 13 payment plan if a debtor contributes all of his "projected disposable income" to pay creditors over the "applicable commitment period." While disposable income is defined as the "current monthly income …

Loopholes For The Affluent Bankrupt, David R. Hague

St. John's Law Review

(Excerpt)

Recent bankruptcy cases are exposing a problem. Affluent individuals filing for bankruptcy are treated more favorably under the Bankruptcy Code than those debtors with little to no means of financial sustenance or income. Did Congress intend this result? The legislative history is unclear. But one thing seems certain: The United States Bankruptcy Code contains a set of loopholes that appear to be designed for the well-to-do segment of society. Courts throughout the United States are either overlooking these provisions or simply condoning their utilization under the defensible conviction that the Bankruptcy Code permits it.

In this Article, I argue …

A Means Test At Odds With Itself: The Secured Debt Expense In Chapter 7 Consumer Bankruptcy Cases After The Supreme Court’S Decision In Lanning And Ransom, Roma Perez

University of Miami Business Law Review

No abstract provided.

Determining When The Granting Of Relief Is Deemed Abuse Of The Bankruptcy Code Under Section 707, Angela Bonica

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

There is no constitutional right for an individual to have their debts discharged. A discharge is a privilege offered to the honest but unfortunate debtor pursuant to title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”). A bankruptcy court considers different standards and/or tests to determine when a debtor may be abusing the relief provided under the Bankruptcy Code. The specific provision that restricts relief because of abuse was originally enacted in 1984, and then amended in 2005 under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (“BAPCPA”). A main purpose of the BAPCPA was to deter abuses …

Bankruptcy Law—Rethinking The Discharge Of Late Filed Taxes In Consumer Bankruptcy, Justin H. Dion, Barbara Curatolo

Faculty Scholarship

The 2005 amendments to the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA) was enacted in order to improve bankruptcy law. However, BAPCPA has made the issue of whether late-filed taxes are dischargeable even murkier than before the amendments. After BAPCPA, some courts continued to analyze claims as they had before the amendment. Others used a “one-day-late rule” that prevented late-filed taxes from being dischargeable—even if the taxes were filed only one day late. This Article suggests a different approach. It argues that the legislature intended tax debt associated with late-filed income tax returns be dischargeable if the …

Bankruptcy Law, Hon. Kevin R. Huennekens, Nathan Kramer

University of Richmond Law Review

This article will cover both consumer and business bankruptcy issues, and is limited primarily to decisions by courts within the Fourth Circuit since mid-2012. Despite these general parameters, because bankruptcy is federal law, there are some cases outside the Fourth Circuit that are included due to their influential and instructive nature. The intention of this update is to provide bankruptcy practitioners in Virginia with concise, yet compre-hensive, case summaries that will prove to be a valuable researchtool.

Not So Secure: Should Social Security Benefits Be Considered In The Good Faith Analysis Under 11 U.S.C. § 1325(A)(3)?, Casey J. Davis

Akron Law Review

Part II of this Comment provides background information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy. This section is important because it provides a foundation for the remainder of this Comment. Part III of this Comment explores the source of this split and how the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”) has affected this issue. Within Part III, this Comment will discuss why Congress enacted BAPCPA, the largest overhaul of bankruptcy law since its origin, and why BAPCPA did not affect the good faith requirement under § 1325(a)(3) even though BAPCPA drastically altered bankruptcy law. In addition, this section also …

Divorcing Into Debt: How Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention And Consumer Protection Act Created A New Class Member In America's Debtors' Prisons, Bobby A. Lean Jr.

Bobby A Lean Jr.

This paper takes a look into BAPCPA and how 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(15) of the bankruptcy code creates a debtors' prison. It then compares the Florida courts and the Ohio courts and how creditors can use this section to potentially jail their debtors. Using policy analysis the paper turns to possible solutions and the cost there of.

Despite A Very High Income, Chapter 7 Debtor’S May Succeed, Pamela Frederick

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Section 707 of the Bankruptcy Code governs when a court may dismiss a chapter 7 bankruptcy case. Under section 707(a), a court may dismiss a chapter 7 case “for cause.” In 2005, Congress enacted the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (“BAPCPA”) and amended section 707(b) to include the so-called “means test,” which provides a formula for determining whether “cause” exists to dismiss (or convert with the debtor’s consent) the debtor’s case. Courts split as to whether this amendment to section 707(b) permits a court to consider the debtor’s income when deciding whether to dismiss the debtor’s chapter …

Second Circuit Sets A Low Bar For Foreign Debtors Seeking Chapter 15 Relief, Samantha Ruppenthal

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Continued globalization of trade and investment led Congress, through the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (“BAPCPA”), to amend the Bankruptcy Code (“the Code”) in 2005 to include chapter 15. Chapter 15 adopted UNCITRAL’s Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency —both aim to guide parties through cross-border insolvency proceedings. In addition to the policy objectives for all bankruptcies, chapter 15 specifically aspires to foster cooperation between the United States and foreign countries involved in cross-border insolvency cases and promote greater legal certainty in global trade and investment. A chapter 15 case is generally meant to supplement the plenary case …

Shooing The Vultures Away From The Consumer Bankruptcy Carcass: Attorney Fees Owed By Debtors For Marital Dissolution Are Not Domestic Support Obligations, Christopher V. Davis

University of Massachusetts Law Review

This Note will focus on consumer bankruptcy related to chapter 7 and chapter 13 filings. Section I provides an introduction to DSOs and the goals of enforcing them through bankruptcy. Section I also discusses the impact of DSO status on the automatic stay, discharge, priority status for property distribution of the bankruptcy estate, capability to reach exempt property, and application to attorney fees. Section II argues that, where attorney fees are not owed to a spouse, former spouse, or child, and do not fit within an impact exception, the fees are not DSOs, but instead are merely general non-secured claims. …

Reclaim This! Getting Credit Seller Rights In Bankruptcy Right, Lawrence Ponoroff

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Bankruptcy Law, Hon. Douglas O. Tice Jr., K. Elizabeth Sieg, David W. Gaffey

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Rehabilitating Bankruptcy Reform, Kara J. Bruce

Nevada Law Journal

No abstract provided.

A Chapter 11 Debtor's Life After Oct. 17: Not So Bad If You Effectively Plan, Michelle M. Harner, Carl E. Black

Michelle M. Harner

No abstract provided.

Forward Contracts Preference Exception Broadly Construed, Brian King

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Derivative transactions and financial contracts are a critical component of the United States economy. There are three main types of derivative contracts executed in our markets: futures, options and forward contracts. Each of these instruments derives value from an underlying security or resource with focus on a possible change in its future value. These instruments can be used as speculative investments, as hedges on securities already owned, or as a means of mitigating risk on volatility within a specific industry. An essential attribute of trading in these derivatives is “the ability of the parties to value their transaction on …

In Re Pichhi; Modifications Of Multi-Family Home Mortgages, Patrick Mcburney

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

In a decision with important implications for lenders in the real estate business, the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the First Circuit determined that debtors can strip down a creditor’s under-secured claim in a multi-family dwelling to the appraised value of the property. While the Bankruptcy Technical Corrections Act of 2010 (“BTCA”) were in effect at the time of the decision, the panel decided the issue under the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”) because both parties argued the issue under the BAPCPA definitions and declined to raise the applicability of BTCA to the issue. Specifically …

Consumer Bankruptcy Policy: Ability To Pay And Catholic Social Teaching, Richard E. Flint

Faculty Articles

An essay is presented on consumer bankruptcy policy in the U.S. It informs about the significant changes in the consumer bankruptcy introduced by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 including incorporation of an ability-to-pay test as a requirement for getting the benefits of the act. It reviews the Catholic social teaching related to the interrelationship between the dignity of man and his rights and duties to promote justice and the common good.

The Affordability Paradox: How Consumer Bankruptcy's Greatest Weakness May Account For Its Surprising Success, Angela Littwin

William & Mary Law Review

When the 2005 Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (BAPCPA) made consumer bankruptcy more expensive for all debtors, it inadvertently reignited a debate about how to make the system more affordable for its neediest beneficiaries. Even before BAPCPA, consumer bankruptcy suffered from the irony that those who needed it the most were often too poor to take advantage of its relief.

The seemingly obvious solution to this problem is to eliminate the major cost that consumer bankruptcy filers bear, that of paying their own lawyers. But in our rush to undo the harm caused by BAPCPA’s worsening of the …

The Costs Of Bapcpa: Report Of The Pilot Study Of Consumer Bankruptcy Cases, Lois R. Lupica

Faculty Publications

Substantial changes were made to the consumer bankruptcy system with the enactment of BAPCPA. These changes, however, were enacted without data support for, or recognition of how such changes would affect the cost of accessing the bankruptcy system. The Costs of BAPCPA Pilot Study undertook a review of the costs of the consumer bankruptcy system following BAPCPA's enactment, to determine if costs were increased, and if so, whether these costs were passed on to the consumer. The issue of "costs" distills the question of what attorneys are charging consumers to represent them under the new regime. Thus a study of …

Bankruptcy Law, Hon. Douglas O. Tice Jr., Suzanne E. Wade, K. Elizabeth Sieg

University of Richmond Law Review

No abstract provided.

Applying The “Applicable” Standard Or The Actual Amount: Monthly Rent In A Debtor’S Chapter 13 Plan, Paola Chiarenza

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Under The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”) (S. 256, Pub. L. No. 109–8, 119 Stat. 23), debtors are subjected to a test in order to ensure their creditors are repaid as much as possible. Chapter 13 requires debtors in bankruptcy to file a plan indicting a monthly amount they will repay to creditors over a given set of years. The amount to be repaid is a debtor’s entire “disposable income,” which is income minus expenses. See 11 U.S.C. § 1325 (2007). Deductable expenses are to be calculated the same as a chapter 7 filing. …

Negligent Vehicular Homicide Caps A Debtor’S Homestead Exemption, Christine Knoesel

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

In an expansive reading of the homestead exemption cap added by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA), the First Circuit Court of Appeals, in Larson v. Howell, held that criminal negligence is sufficient to trigger the section 522(q)(1)(B)(iv) homestead exemption cap. 513 F.3d 325, 328 (1st Cir. 2008). In Larson v. Howell, Larson was found guilty of negligent vehicular homicide. In Larson’s bankruptcy case, the homestead exemption cap was applied because the debt arose from a criminal act. Id. at 327. The Court of Appeals reasoned that the cap should apply …

Bapcpa’S Exception To The Absolute Priority Rule For Individual Chapter 11 Debtors, Christina Kormylo

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

Under the absolute priority rule of 11 U.S.C. § 1129(b)(2)(B)(ii), a reorganization plan that gives a junior class of creditors an interest in the estate will not be confirmed unless each senior class receives full payment or gives its consent. The absolute priority rule was amended in 2005 by the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (“BAPCPA”) by adding an exception that allows individual chapter 11 debtors to retain property included in the estate under newly added section 1115. This amendment furthers the congressional intent of allowing chapter 11 to function more like chapter 13, under which there …

Ride Through Option For Real Property Survived Bapcpa, James Lynch

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

The Bankruptcy Abuse Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”) largely eliminated the so-called “ride through” option for security interests in personal property; however, for nearly two years there was no clear indication as to whether the ride through option still existed for security interests in real property. Recently, in In re Caraballo, the Connecticut Bankruptcy Court confronted this uncertainty head on and determined that the ride through option still exists for real property. 386 B.R. 398, 400 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2008). Importantly for bankrupt individuals, utilizing the ride through option allows them to “keep their property during and after bankruptcy …

Whether Negative Equity Is Part Of Purchase Money Security Interest?, Vitaly Libman

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

The 2005 BAPCPA amendments have turned routine car purchases into a source of litigation in the federal courts. The litigation stems from the financing agreements made during the transaction. Today, these financing agreements often require the purchaser to repay loans over a term of five years or longer. See, e.g. In re Peaslee, 358 B.R. 545, 554 (Bankr. W.D.N.Y. 2006). During these long terms, cars rapidly depreciate in value. Consequently, many consumers are left with vehicles that have a market value less then the amount of debt still owed on them. This deficiency is called “negative equity.” Often, consumers …

Bapcpa Does Not Require The Chapter 13 Means Test In Individual Chapter 11 Cases, Steven Saal

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (“BAPCPA”) was implemented in order to prevent debtors from unjustly shielding value in their estate from deserving creditors and thus abusing the functionality of the federal bankruptcy system. Specifically, one problem perceived to be very prevalent was a practice by individual debtors who would seek to avoid the stringent guidelines of the “means test” in Chapter 13 cases by running for the protection of the more relaxed standards in Chapter 11 cases. The BAPCPA Amendments to section 1129 of the Bankruptcy Code were adopted to institute stricter standards in Chapter 11 …

American Home Mortgage, Holdings, Inc. V. Lehman Brothers Inc., Valerie Sokha

Bankruptcy Research Library

(Excerpt)

The derivatives provisions of the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”) amendments greatly enlarged the scope of the financial contracts that are shielded from traditional bankruptcy limitations such as the automatic stay and the prohibition on ipso facto clauses. Those exceptions were reaffirmed in a strong anti-debtor opinion in Am. Home Mortg. Inv. Corp. v. Lehman Bros. (In re Am. Home Mortg. Holdings, Inc.), 388 B.R. 69 (Bankr. D. Del 2008). Although Lehman may now regret its victory since it is a debtor in its own bankruptcy case, it succeeded in defeating a number …

An Empirical Examination Of Access To Chapter 7 Relief By Pro Se Debtors, Rafael I. Pardo

Scholarship@WashULaw

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA) represents the most significant overhaul of federal bankruptcy law since the Bankruptcy Code’s enactment in 1978. The legislation expanded the grounds on which a debtor’s Chapter 7 case may be dismissed. Moreover, it increased the administrative requirements imposed upon debtors who file for bankruptcy (e.g., increased financial disclosures), which in turn has had the effect of increasing the direct costs of filing for bankruptcy (e.g., filing fees and attorneys’ fees). With this increased complexity in accessing Chapter 7 relief, the question arises whether BAPCPA has had a disproportionate impact …