Recent Cases
Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited Inc. v. Burton
Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited Inc. v. Burton Coney Island Auto Parts Unlimited Inc. v. Burton, 24-808 (U.S.Sup. Ct. Jan. 20, 2026): This 1/20/26 US Supreme Court decision–, which puts a time limit of “a reasonable time” to move, pursuant to FRCP Rule 60(b)(4), to set aside a void US District Court judgment, will also apply in Bankruptcy Court. This is because in Bankruptcy Court, FRBP Rule 9024 (relief from judgment or order) states that FRCP Rule 60 applies, except for the few exceptions stated in FRBP Rule 9024(a)(1), (2) & (3). Here is analysis of this US Supreme Court…
In re Vaughan, ___-bk-___ (Bankr. Court S.D. Ohio Jan. 2, 2026), bankruptcy case no. 25-31806:
Because dismissal under Section 521(i)(1) is automatic and does not result from an order, there’s no rule to vacate dismissal for excusable neglect. One of the BAPCPA amendments in 2005, Section 521(i)(1), is unforgiving. If a chapter 13 case is dismissed automatically for failure to file all required papers within 45 days, the bankruptcy court has no power to set aside dismissal under the Bankruptcy Code or the Bankruptcy Rules, for reasons explained in a January 2 opinion by Bankruptcy Judge Tyson A. Crist of Dayton, Ohio. With counsel, the debtor filed a skeletal chapter 13 petition. The court entered…
In re USA Cricket, 25-16318 (Bankr. D. Colo. Dec. 15, 2025):
Some courts have said that Sub V status can be revoked involuntarily by the court in ‘narrow circumstances.’ If the Code doesn’t authorize the court to “convert” a Subchapter V case to a “regular” chapter 11, what relief can the court give when the debtor is dysfunctional? Is the court limited to dismissing the Subchapter V case, converting to chapter 7 or expanding the powers of the Subchapter V trustee? That’s a question answered by Bankruptcy Judge Michael E. Romero of Denver in a December 15 opinion. The corporate debtor had elected to proceed as a small business under Subchapter…
Royal Street Bistro LLC v. Arrowhead Capital Finance Ltd. (In re Royal Street Bistro LLC)
Royal Street Bistro LLC v. Arrowhead Capital Finance Ltd. (In re Royal Street Bistro LLC), 24-30732 (5th Cir. Nov. 17, 2025), the US Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit rules that an appellant’s failure to attach a copy of the judgment the appellant is appealing, to the appellant’s notice of appeal, is not ‘so egregious’ as to warrant dismissal of the appeal. Failing to attach a copy of the judgment to the notice of appeal isn’t jurisdictional and isn’t grounds in itself for dismissing an appeal, the Fifth Circuit said in a November 17 opinion. In a lawsuit in…
Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants of Bestwall LLC v. Bestwall LLC (In re Bestwall LLC)
Official Committee of Asbestos Claimants of Bestwall LLC v. Bestwall LLC (In re Bestwall LLC), 24-1493 (4th Cir. Oct. 30, 2025) Speculation among bankruptcy lawyers nationwide is whether this case result in US Supreme Court granting a petition for certiorari on whether a solvent corporation can file bankruptcy, or whether only an insolvent corporation can file bankruptcy: By a vote of 8/6, the Fourth Circuit denied rehearing en banc on the question of whether federal courts only have subject matter jurisdiction over insolvent debtors. Over a dissent, the Fourth Circuit held on August 1 that the bankruptcy court has subject…
Keathley v. Buddy Ayres Construction Inc., 25-6 (Sup. Ct.)
Keathley v. Buddy Ayres Construction Inc., 25-6 (Sup. Ct.).The US Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve a circuit split on the standard to employ before invoking judicial estoppel when a chapter 13 debtor failed to disclose a personal injury claim. The date for oral argument has not been set, but the case should be heard in time for a decision before the end of the term in June. The case came to the Supreme Court from the Fifth Circuit, where invocation of judicial estoppel only requires a “plausible” motive for failure to disclose a personal injury claim. One of the…
In re Sun, __BR__24-20581 (Bankr. D.N.J. Sept. 29, 2025)
Bankruptcy Judge Meisel implores the Third Circuit to follow other circuits on dismissing bad faith debtors’ chapter 13 petitions but with bars to refiling. Regarding the right of a chapter 13 debtor to dismiss a case filed in bad faith, Bankruptcy Judge Stacey L. Meisel of Newark, N.J., said it all in the second paragraph of her opinion: A Chapter 13 Debtor possesses an absolute right to dismiss his bankruptcy case . . . even if the debtor acts in bad faith. However, this does not mean that a debtor gets a free pass to abuse the bankruptcy process. A…
In re Joiner, 25-30396 (Bankr. W.D.N.C. Sept. 2, 2025)
In re Joiner, 25-30396 (Bankr. W.D.N.C. Sept. 2, 2025) is a fascinating new Bankruptcy Court decision about the interplay of 11 USC 1190(3)—which is one of the Bankruptcy Code provisions specific to SubV Chapter 11 bankruptcy cases–and 11 USC 1111(b). This case is significant because many bankruptcy attorneys are not aware 11 USC 1190(3) exists, much less how it interfaces with 11 USC 1111(b) Contrary to the language in Section 1190(3), the bankruptcy court did not allow bifurcation of a lien that wasn’t used to acquire a home but was used for the debtor’s small business. In Subchapter V of…
Hayes v. United States of America (In re Applied Machinery Rentals, LLC)
Hayes v. United States of America (In re Applied Machinery Rentals, LLC), 2025 WL 1297432 (April 30, 2025, Bankruptcy Ct, Western District of North Carolina ): The Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina (the Court) recently ruled that a chapter 7 trustee could use Bankruptcy Code §§ 548 and 550 to recover from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) taxes which had been paid on behalf of the Debtor’s principal with property of the estate. It held that the IRS was the initial transferee even though the payment came from a bank account in the principal’s name and…
Brown v. Thermal Surgical LLC, 24-127 (2d Cir. Aug. 8, 2025)
US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit barred offensive use of claim preclusion based on ‘fairness’ , and hinted that offensive claim preclusion might never be permitted. Second Circuit held that a creditor may not use an uncontested claim allowance in an offensive use of claim preclusion if it would be “unfair.” In her August 8 opinion, Circuit Judge Beth Robinson stopped short of deciding whether offensive claim preclusion is never permissible. If offensive claim preclusion were squarely present, she hinted that it might never be allowed. Uncontested Claim Allowance The debtor had been a sales representative for his…