News
US Supreme Court has Granted Certiorari, regarding Wellness Int’l Network, Limited v. Sharif, 727 F.3d 751 (7th Cir. 2013), cert. granted, 134 S.Ct. 2901 (2014)
US Supreme Court has Granted Certiorari, regarding Wellness Int’l Network, Limited v. Sharif, 727 F.3d 751 (7th Cir. 2013), cert. granted, 134 S.Ct. 2901 (2014), meaning that US Supreme Court, in its fall 2014 term, will hear and decide the issue raised by the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals decision, which is: Whether the presence of a subsidiary state property law issue in a 11 U.S.C. § 541 action brought against a debtor to determine whether property in the debtor’s possession is property of the bankruptcy estate means that such action does not "stem[] from the bankruptcy itself" and therefore,…
New Bankruptcy Filing Fee Increases to Take Effect June 1
The Judicial Conference of the United States has approved several bankruptcy related fee increases to take effect starting June 1. Based on the chapter, the cost to file will be: Chapter7: $335 Chapter13: $310 Chapter9,11and15: $1,717 Chapter 12: $275 The fee schedule changes project to raise about $35 million per year for the courts, based on current case loads.
Analysis: Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Whether an Inherited IRA is Exempt
By Charles J. Tabb Mildred Van Voorhis Jones Chair in Law, University of Illinois, and Resident Scholar for the American Bankruptcy Institute The United States Supreme Court yesterday heard oral arguments in the case of Clark v. Rameker, on the issue of whether an inherited IRA is exempt. The Seventh Circuit had denied the debtor’s exemption, disagreeing with the Fifth Circuit in the Chilton case, as well as the clear majority of lower courts, which had held that an inherited IRA is exempt under section 522(b)(3)(C) or 522(d)(12) (depending on whether the debtor elects the state or federal exemptions). On…
Preview: Scope of Protections for Retirement Funds in Bankruptcy at Issue in Case Before Supreme Court on Monday
Scheduled for oral argument on Monday, Clark v. Rameker presents the Supreme Court with a case that has a clean and straightforward question of statutory interpretation, with no looming shadow of oppressive media scrutiny, according to a SCOTUSBlog preview of the argument. Among the assets exempt from the estate of a debtor in bankruptcy, Congress has with steadily increasing generosity included a wide variety of retirement funds. The specific question in this case is whether those provisions exempt the $450,000 IRA that petitioner Heidi Clark inherited upon the death of her mother. If the IRA is exempt, she can keep…
Public Comment Period Ending Soon for Proposed Amendments to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure
The Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on Bankruptcy Rules has proposed amendments to the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure and Official Forms, and requested that the proposals be circulated to the bench, bar, and public for comment. On August 15, 2013, the public comment period opened for the proposed amendments to Bankruptcy Rules 2002, 3002, 3007, 3012, 3015, 4003, 5005, 5009, 7001, 9006, and 9009, and Official Forms 17A, 17B, 17C, 22A-1, 22A-1Supp, 22A-2, 22B, 22C-1, 22C-2, 101, 101A, 101B, 104, 105, 106Sum, 106A/B, 106C, 106D, 106E/F, 106G, 106H, 106Dec, 107, 112, 113, 119, 121, 318, 423, and 427. The public…
U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Case on Inherited IRAs in Bankruptcy
The U.S. Supreme Court will hear a dispute in the bankruptcy of a small-town pizza shop owner, taking on a case that could dictate how inherited individual retirement accounts are treated in bankruptcy, Reuters reported yesterday. The Supreme Court said yesterday that it would hear arguments in Clark v. Rameker in a fight over whether Heidi Heffron-Clark and her husband, Brandon Clark, can keep creditors from going after $300,000 in an IRA inherited from Heffron-Clark’s late mother. The Clarks declared bankruptcy in 2010 after the pizza shop they opened in their home town of Soughton, Wis., fell victim to economic…
Bellingham Oral Argument Recap: Bankruptcy and the Slippery Slope
The Supreme Court’s recent strong record of confining bankruptcy judges within a tight sphere of power seemed a bit shaky on Tuesday, but mainly because the Court spent significant time looking beyond bankruptcy law, according to a SCOTUSBlog analysis of Tuesday’s oral argument in Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison (In re Bellingham) currently before the Supreme Court. Concerns about the impact that a decision in a chapter 7 case may have on the ranks of federal magistrate judges, and even on arbitrators who keep a lot of private disputes out of courts, were evident during the argument on In…
US Supreme Court to hear and decide 2 appeals in two different bankruptcy cases
The United States Supreme Court has granted “certiorari” on two bankruptcy cases, meaning that the United States Supreme Court will hear and decide the the appeals of the following 2 bankruptcy cases, in the Court’s 2013-2014 session The two cases are the appeals of (1) Law v. Siegel, which questions whether the court may use its general equitable authority under §105 of the Bankruptcy Code to surcharge a debtor’s exempt assets, and (2) Executive Benefits Insurance Agency v. Arkison (In re Bellingham), which will address the bankruptcy court’s authority to adjudicate Article III matters. Whenever the US Supreme Court rules…
Beware of Breadth of Attorneys Fees Clauses in Contracts
Maynard vs. BTI Group, Inc., 2013 Westlaw 2322608 (California Court of Appeals 2013): Facts: An individual owned a retail business and retained a broker to help her sell it. Although the business was sold, the purchaser soon filed a bankruptcy petition, leaving a portion of the purchase price unpaid. Supposedly, the broker failed to obtain security from the purchaser, despite the seller’s instructions to do so. Following the purchaser’s default, the seller brought suit against the broker, asserting claims for breach of contract and negligence. She prevailed on her negligence claim but not on her contract claim. The trial court…
Recent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision re Judicial Estoppel
Recent 9th Circuit Court of Appeals Decision re Judicial Estoppel: Usually, where a debtor fails to list (schedule) a claim/cause of action/lawsuit in which debtor is plaintiff, and in which other persons/entities are defendants, the punishment is that the debtor is NOT allowed to pursue that claim, after the bankruptcy case is over (debtor is estopped to pursue claim after bankruptcy, because debtor failed to schedule the existence of the claim, in debtor’s bankruptcy schedules. However, in Ah Quin v. County of HI, F.3d, 2013 DAR 9634 (9th Cir. 7/25/13), the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Debtor/plaintiff…