The Supreme Court unanimously decided today that denial of confirmation is not a final, appealable, order. Bullard v. Blue Hills Bank, 575 U.S. ___, No. 14-116 (U.S. May 4, 2015). [Read more…] about Supreme Court Finds Denial of Confirmation not Appealable Order
Objection to Discharge Should Have Been Dismissed as Untimely
The chapter 7 trustee failed to continue the creditors’ meeting to a specified date as required by Rule 2003(e) and therefore his later objection to discharge was untimely. In re Jenkins, No. 14-1385 (4th Cir. Apr. 27, 2015). [Read more…] about Objection to Discharge Should Have Been Dismissed as Untimely
Child Support Exclusion Not Reduced By Expense Deduction
The Seventh Circuit rejected the trustee’s argument to limit the debtor’s child support exclusion to those expenses that are not otherwise deductible under section 1325. In re Brooks, No. 14-2856 (7th Cir. Apr. 23, 2015). [Read more…] about Child Support Exclusion Not Reduced By Expense Deduction
Court Disapproves Modification to Pay Outside Plan
Using inflexible reasoning, a bankruptcy court found that the debtors could not amend their plan to make mortgage payments outside the plan. In re Vela, No. 12-06512 (Bankr. W.D. Mich. March 13, 2015). [Read more…] about Court Disapproves Modification to Pay Outside Plan
$2 Million Jury Verdict Against Mortgage Servicer
On Monday, Alena Hammer obtained a $2 million jury verdict against Residential Credit Solutions, Inc. (RCS), a national mortgage loan servicer, for its breach of contract, violations of the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA), and violations of the unfairness and deception provisions of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. All of Hammer’s claims dealt with RCS’s misconduct in handling and servicing the mortgage loan on Hammer’s home in DuPage County, Illinois, where Hammer has resided for the last 27 years.
[Read more…] about $2 Million Jury Verdict Against Mortgage Servicer
Differing Interest Rates for Cure and Maintain
The terms of the underlying lending agreement dictated the interest rate applicable to the debtors’ cure and maintain provision in their chapter 13 plan. In re Anderson, No. 14-690 (E.D. N.C. April 6, 2015). [Read more…] about Differing Interest Rates for Cure and Maintain
Cert. Denied in LVNV v. Crawford
The Supreme Court has declined to take up the issue of whether filing a stale proof of claim in a bankruptcy case violates the FDCPA. Previously, the Eleventh Circuit found that a proof of claim to collect a stale debt in chapter 13 violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. In Crawford, however, the Eleventh Circuit side-stepped the issue of whether an irreconcilable conflicts exists between the Bankruptcy Code and the FDCPA, such that creditor’s conduct in bankruptcy would not be actionable under the FDCPA.
Order on Stay Violation Final despite Pending Issue as to Attorney Fee Award
Where the only issue left to be determined was whether the debtor had incurred attorney fees and costs in connection with the creditor’s stay violation, the order finding liability and determining actual damages was a final, appealable order. USDA v. Sexton (In re Sexton), No. 14-453 (W.D. Va. March 31, 2015). [Read more…] about Order on Stay Violation Final despite Pending Issue as to Attorney Fee Award
Sternberg Does Not Preclude Attorney Fee Award
Where the creditor had not returned garnished funds at the time of the hearing for damages for the stay violation, the debtor was entitled to recovery of attorney fees incurred in connection with that hearing. In re Eeds, No. 14-61005 (Bankr. Mont. March 16, 2015). [Read more…] about Sternberg Does Not Preclude Attorney Fee Award
No Issue Preclusion Where Verdict Could Have Been Based on Negligence
The element of “willful and malicious injury” in the discharge exception under section 523(a)(6) could not be established by issue preclusion where the state court judgment could have been based on negligence. Gerard v. Gerard, No. 14-1496 (7th Cir. March 12, 2015). [Read more…] about No Issue Preclusion Where Verdict Could Have Been Based on Negligence