The IRS had no reasonable basis for challenging the bankruptcy court’s exercise of personal jurisdiction, where it consented to jurisdiction when it filed a claim in the debtor’s chapter 7 bankruptcy, and the debtor notified it of his objection to the claim using the address the IRS provided. For that reason, the debtor was entitled to recover fees and costs associated with litigation of the IRS’s claim. Nicolaus v. United States of America, No. 21-3010 (N.D. Iowa March 8, 2022). Read More
Tag Archive: Jurisdiction
-
IRS Had No “Substantial Justification” for Challenging Jurisdiction
Posted by NCBRC - March 30th, 2022
-
Sixth Circuit Discusses Appellate Jurisdiction
Posted by NCBRC - December 29th, 2020
Where the BAP remanded to the bankruptcy court for a finding on whether the creditor violated the automatic stay by failing to prevent the continuation of a contempt hearing against the debtor, the Sixth Circuit relied on precedent to conclude that the BAP’s order was not final and appealable. Wohleber v. Skurko (In re Wohleber), No. 19-3223/3225 (6th Cir. Nov. 18, 2020) (unpublished). In her concurring opinion, Judge Batchelder argued that the precedent relied on by the majority was erroneous and advocated for adopting a rule that “we have appellate jurisdiction if either the bankruptcy court’s judgment or the intermediate appellate judgment is final.” Read More
-
Debtor’s Service of Objection to the IRS’s Proof of Claim was Proper
Posted by NCBRC - July 16th, 2020
The bankruptcy court had personal jurisdiction over the IRS when the debtor mailed a copy of his objection to the address given with the proof of claim in accordance with Rule 3007, rather than serving the IRS through the Attorney General as required for contested motions under Rules 9014 and 7004. Nicolaus v. United States, No. 19-1155 (8th Cir. July 6, 2020). Read More
-
Ninth Circuit Ties Itself in Knots to Affirm Lien Avoidance Dismissal
Posted by NCBRC - April 4th, 2020
In an unusual path, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of the debtor’s lien avoidance action where it found the underlying lien, based on an abstract of judgment which did not “substantially comply” with state requirements, to be invalid. Sanger v. Ahn (In re Ahn), No. 18-16794 (9th Cir. Feb. 28, 2020) (unpublished).
Ms. Ahn filed an adversary complaint in her bankruptcy seeking declaratory judgment that the Sangers’ lien was invalid because it was based on an abstract of judgment which did not comply with state law notice requirements. In the alternative, Ms. Ahn sought to avoid the judicial lien as impairing her homestead exemption. The bankruptcy court granted summary judgment to Ms. Ahn on the declaratory judgment count and dismissed the lien avoidance claim as moot.
On appeal, the district court found that the bankruptcy court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to reach the declaratory judgment claim and reversed that holding. Rather than remanding to the bankruptcy court to address the issue of lien avoidance, however, the district court instead went on to determine that the underlying judicial lien was invalid and, therefore, the debtor’s homestead exemption was not impaired under section 522(f). The district court, therefore, affirmed the bankruptcy court’s dismissal of the lien-avoidance claim. Read More
-
Bankruptcy Court May Not Enforce Discharge Order from Other District
Posted by NCBRC - November 15th, 2019
On direct interlocutory appeal, the Fifth Circuit found that courts may not use their contempt powers to enforce discharge orders issued by other courts outside their judicial districts. The court also held that the private student loans at issue were not subject to section 523(a)(8)(A)(ii)’s nondischargeability provision because that provision applies only to educational benefits where, as in the case of grants or scholarships, the obligation to repay is conditional. Crocker v. Navient Solutions LLC, No. 18-20254 (5th Cir. Oct. 22, 2019). Read More
-
Rooker-Feldman No Bar to Exercise of Trustee’s Strong-Arm Power
Posted by NCBRC - July 23rd, 2018
The Sixth Circuit agreed with the position advanced in NACBA / NCBRC’s amicus brief that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not preclude application of the trustee’s strong-arm power to avoid a lien notwithstanding a state court judgment of foreclosure. Isaacs v. DBI-ASG Coinvestor Fund III, LLC (In re Isaacs), No. 17-5815 (6th Cir. July 18, 2018).
Linda Isaacs and her husband entered into a mortgage agreement with GMAC Mortgage Corporation. The contract provided in the “description of security,” that “By signing this Mortgage, we hereby mortgage, grant and convey [the collateral],” and, in the “priority of advances” section, that “The lien of this Mortgage will attach on the date this mortgage is recorded.” Shortly after signing the agreement, Ms. Isaacs filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy. She scheduled GMAC as a secured creditor not realizing that it had not yet recorded the mortgage. GMAC recorded the mortgage while the automatic stay was in effect. Ten years after Ms. Isaacs obtained her chapter 7 discharge, the successor to GMAC, sought an order of foreclosure against the Isaacs. The state court issued a default order of foreclosure and, one day before the scheduled sale, Ms. Isaacs filed for chapter 13 bankruptcy. Read More
-
Court Properly Declined to Compel Arbitration of Educational Loan Issue
Posted by NCBRC - October 23rd, 2017
Potential discharge of an educational loan is a core bankruptcy proceeding over which the bankruptcy court may exercise jurisdiction despite an arbitration clause in the lending agreement. Navient Solutions v. Farmer, No. 17-764 (W.D. Wash. Oct. 16, 2017).
In her chapter 7 bankruptcy, Janay Farmer sought to discharge a loan she had taken out to finance her post-graduation bar-examination. The lender, Navient, moved to compel arbitration in accordance with the terms of the lending agreement. Reasoning that the issue of treatment of the loan was a core bankruptcy matter, the bankruptcy court found that it had discretion to exercise jurisdiction over the case. In re Farmer, 567 B.R. 895 (Bankr. W.D. Wash. 2017). Read More
-
Reminder: Timely Notice of Appeal Is Jurisdictional
Posted by NCBRC - October 18th, 2017
Timely filing of a notice of appeal is a jurisdictional prerequisite and an appellant must at least conform his filing to general adherence to the requirements set forth in Rule 8003(3). In re Dorsey, 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 16905, No. 16-31085 (5th Cir. Sept. 1, 2017). Read More
-
No Jurisdiction over Appeal of District Court Vacation of Confirmation Order
Posted by NCBRC - September 14th, 2017
“When a district court vacates a bankruptcy court order confirming a bankruptcy plan and remands for further proceedings, there is no final order sufficient to confer jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d).” Bank of New York Mellon v. Watt, No. 15-35484 (9th Cir. Aug. 16, 2017).
In their bankruptcy plan, Nicholas and Patricia Watt included a provision vesting title to their residence in mortgagee, Bank of NY, and specifying that “vesting shall not merge or otherwise affect the extent, validity, or priority of any liens on the property.” Bank of NY opposed the mandatory vesting provision and objected to confirmation of the plan. The bankruptcy court confirmed the plan. Read More
-
Deadline for Revocation of Discharge Not Jurisdictional
Posted by NCBRC - July 12th, 2017
The one-year deadline for seeking revocation of a discharge order is not jurisdictional and may therefore be waived. Weil v. Elliott (In re Elliott), No. 16-55359 (9th Cir. June 14, 2017).
When Edward Elliott filed his chapter 7 bankruptcy petition he failed to mention one important asset: his home. He received a discharge under section 727(a). Fifteen months later, when the trustee discovered the fraudulent nondisclosure, she filed an adversary complaint seeking an order vacating the discharge under section 727(d)(1). Section 727(e)(1) permits a trustee to seek revocation of discharge within one year of the discharge order. Mr. Elliott did not raise the issue of untimeliness in his response to the adversary complaint. The bankruptcy court revoked his discharge. The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel, however, found the one-year filing deadline to be jurisdictional and reversed. Elliott v. Weil (In re Elliott), 529 B.R. 747, 755 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2015). On remand, the bankruptcy court dismissed the adversary complaint for lack of jurisdiction. The trustee was permitted direct appeal to the Ninth Circuit. Read More
-
Request Assistance
Request assistance with a case.
-
Help NCBRC
NCBRC needs your support to protect the rights of consumer bankruptcy debtors. The most effective way to support NCBRC is with a direct donation.
There are many other ways to give to NRBRC:
iGive.com: When you purchase items at over 1,400 online stores, a percentage of your purchase will be donated to NCBRC. Stores include Macy’s, Melissa and Doug, Bed Bath & Beyond, Nike, Petsmart, and more. Shop and Give today!
-
Keep up with NCBRC
Thank you!
Thank you to the following organizations without whose support our work would not be possible.
American College of Bankruptcy
The American College of Bankruptcy is an honorary public service association of bankruptcy and insolvency professionals who are invited to join as Fellows based on a proven record of the highest standards of professionalism plus service to the profession and their communities. Together with its affiliated Foundation, the College is the largest financial supporter of bankruptcy and insolvency-related pro bono legal service programs in the United States.NACBA
Visit NACBA.org
The only national organization dedicated to serving the needs of consumer bankruptcy attorneys and protecting the rights of consumer debtors in bankruptcy. Formed in 1992, NACBA has more than 3,000 members located in all 50 states and Puerto Rico.