 | 
|
THE CONSUMER BANKRUPTCY LETTER |
|
|
In This Issue:
|
October 25, 2004
|
|
|
|
•
|
NEXT STOP - SAN ANTONIO
|
|
|
|
•
|
BankruptcyBooks.com - ALL PUBLISHERS
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
PENDING EVENTS, SEMINARS & CLE
|
|
|
|
•
|
HEADS-UP ON RECENT CASES
|
|
|
|
|
•
|
RECORD DEBT DOESN'T BOTHER GREENSPAN
|
|
|
|
|
|
DISCHARGING TAXES - THE POWER SEMINAR!
JOIN MORGAN KING IN SAN ANTONIO
JANUARY 27, 28, 29 2005
DISCHARGING TAXES - FUNDAMENTALS & ADVANCED PROBLEMS
The next dates scheduled for the 5th annual 3-day Bankruptcy Academy on discharging taxes in bankruptcy cases have been scheduled for -
FISHERMAN'S WHARF, S. F., on October 27, 28 & 29, 2004,
SAN ANTONIO, Texas, January 27, 28 & 29, 2005.
Additional 2005 dates are pending.
The 3-day seminar and workshop will be a thorough exploration of bankruptcy remedies for delinquent taxes and tax liens in consumer bankruptcy cases (chapter 7 and chapter 13), emphasizing practical handlng of tax discharge cases from A-to-Z.
CLE ACCREDITATION
Previous programs have qualified for CLE in all states for which CLE accreditation was requested. The Academy is applying for attorneys' CLE accreditation in all states for which CLE is mandatory.
CPE accreditation from the IRS for enrolled agents has been approved.
TUITION
Single attorney $645 until Jan. 10 2005
Texas attorneys only - single attorney $595
Double attorney registration any location $995
Paralegal or other office staff any location $350
Enrolled agent or CPA any location $495
For more information about the Tax Discharge program, or to enroll, click on red below or call (925) 829-6460 west coast time.
|
|
 |
|
|
October 27-29, 2004
KING BANKRUPTCY ACADEMY
Discharging Taxes in Bankruptcy From A to Z
Fisherman's Wharf, San Francisco
BankruptyAcademy.com
November 11, 2004 - November 14, 2004
COMMERCIAL LAW LEAGUE OF AMERICAN
The New York Meeting
New York City, New York
CLLA.org
December 2-4, 2004
AMERICAN BANKRUPTCY INSTITUTE
Winter Leadership Conference
Marriott's Camelback Inn, Scottsdale, AZ
Contact: 1-703-739-0800 or
abiworld.org
January 27, 28, 29 2005
KING BANKRUPTCY ACADEMY
Discharging Taxes in Bankruptcy From A to Z
San Antonio, Texas
BankruptcyAcademy.com
February 26 - March 1 2005
NORTON INSTITUTES OF BANKRUPTCY LAW
Park City, Utah
nortoninstitutes.org
|
|
 |
|
|
DIVORCE ATTORNEY'S FEES REDUCED FROM
$65,276 TO $19,955
A debtor in chapter 13 need not obtain court approval to retain an attorney to represent the debtor in divorce proceedings, but such attorney must apply to the court for approval of fees. In this case the firm representing the debtor in the debtor's divorce applied for approval of fees. The court reduced the amount based on vague descriptions in the services provided in the billing statement, excessive staff conferencing time, and because the firm's fee application did not break out the billable time into respective subject areas.
The debtor's estranged husband objected, arguing in part that 11 U.S.C. § 330 only allows compensatiou out of the estate for services directly related to the bankruptcy, and that divorce proceedings are not directly related. The court rejected that argument and held that services provided to the debtor personally need not be solely for bankruptcy services.
In re Powell (N.D.Tex. 2004)
___________________
LICENSE FORFEITURE NOT A VIOLATION OF AUTOMATIC STAY
The bankruptcy court did not err in finding that the postpetition commencement of license forfeiture proceedings before a State board regulating realtors was not a violation of the automatic stay in the realtor's bankruptcy case.
In re McMullen (1st Cir. 2004)
___________________
DEBTOR'S GUILTY PLEA OF BANKRUPTCY CRIME OF FRAUD JUSTIFIES DENIAL OF DISCHARGE
The United States Trustee moved for Summary Judgment on its Complaint Objecting to Discharge of the Defendant, Kelly R. Petersen, on the basis that KELLY'S plea of guilty to the crime of bankruptcy fraud is conclusive of the facts necessary to establish the grounds for denial of the discharge.
Since fraud elements of both the bankruptcy crime and the grounds for denial of discharge were identical and the debtor had an opportunity to litigate the criminal proceeding but elected not to, the doctrine of collateral estoppel applies to justify summary judgment in denial of discharge proceeding.
In re Peterson, (C.D.Ill. 2004)
___________________
CHAPTER 7 DISMISSED BECAUSE MORTGAGE PAYMENT WAS EXCESSIVE UNDER § 707(b)
A mortgage on a house in which a debtor resides and intends to reside is a consumer debt regardless of the fact that the debtor intends to ultimately sell the house and use the funds for retirement.
The evidence in the record reveals that Debtors' primary purpose in incurring the debt secured by the residence was to furnish and complete the construction of the Debtors' home for family and personal use. Accordingly, we cannot hold that the bankruptcy court clearly erred in finding that the Debtors' debts are primarily consumer debts under § 101(8).
The bankruptcy court did not err in dismissing debtors' Chapter 7 case under section 707(b) where the court found that the debtor's mortage payment was excessive and that reducing the payment would have contributed to funding a Chapter 13 plan.
Debtors' monthly payment on the first mortgage is $2,930 per month and $482 per month on the second mortgage.
The UST produced the testimony of Todd Vandenberg, bankruptcy analyst for the UST's office for the Southern District of Iowa, in support of its motion.
Vandenberg testified that the maximum reasonable housing expense was $1,175 per month. Vandenberg relied on the 2001 Consumer Expenditure Survey produced by the United States Bureau of Labor and Statistics in reaching this conclusion. Vandenberg opined that if Debtors reduced their housing expense to $1,175 per month and included the $1,083 that they had ceased remitting to the IRS in their net income, Debtors would have sufficient disposable income to fund a Chapter 13 plan.
In re Cox (8th Cir. BAP 2004) (Southern District of Iowa)
___________________
PROOF OF CLAIM FAXED TO TRUSTEE'S COUNSEL IS NOT TIMELY
A creditor who faxed its proof of claim to the trustee's counsel on the bar date rather than delivering it by mail to the post office box for the claims agent was not entitled to have the claim treated as timely. The bankruptcy court erred however in disallowing the claim. The claim should have been subordinated to timely filed claims.
In re Outboard Marine Corporation (7th Cir. 2004)
___________________
CHAPTER 13 DEBT0R MAY RETURN COLLATERAL AND AMEND PLAN
A debtor operating under a confirmed Chapter 13 plan is entitled to return collateral to a secured creditor and modify the plan to treat the creditor's claim as unsecured.
In re Mason (Bankr. N.D. Cal. 2004)
|
|
 |
|
|
A very successful lawyer parked his brand-new Lexus in front of his office, ready to show it off to his colleagues. As he got out, a truck passed too close and completely tore off the door on the driver's side. The lawyer immediately grabbed his cell phone, dialed 911, and within minutes a policeman pulled up.
Before the officer had a chance to ask any questions, the lawyer started screaming hysterically. His Lexus, which he had just picked up the day before, was now completely ruined and would never be the same, no matter what the body shop did to it.
When the lawyer finally wound down from his ranting and raving, the officer shook his head in disgust and disbelief. "I can't believe how materialistic you lawyers are," he said. "You are so focused on your possessions that you don't notice anything else."
"How can you say such a thing?" asked the lawyer.
The cop replied, "Don't you know that your left arm is missing from the elbow down? It must have been torn off when the truck hit you."
"My God!" screamed the lawyer. "Where's my Rolex?
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
PUBLISHED BY KING BANKRUPTCY MEDIA FOR BANKRUPTCY PROFESSIONALS 7080 Donlon Way Suite 222 Dublin California 94568 (925) 829-6460
© King Bankruptcy Media 2004 CONTACT US AT editor@bankruptcymedia.com
|
|
|
|
|
|
