Having just lost a state court suit to the tune of $1.5 million with the winner about to collect on the $1.5 million, a debtor with a substantial income files a skeletal chapter 11 petition. One creditor, the state court victor, holds more than 65 percent of the total debt, and the initial list of exempt assets is long and their value considerable. Within 69 days of the petition’s filing and with 51 days left for the debtor to propose a reorganization plan, even these verities are apparent from the skimpy record.
Sites Committee
Committees
Multiple bills have been introduced by Congress recently to address the student debt crisis, which has been consuming headlines for several years. One bill receiving significant attention, H.R. 449, proposes to reverse a 2005 law that prevents debtors from discharging private student loans in bankruptcy cases.[1] In seeming support of the bill, the President recently requested that federal agencies explore this possibility as well. The goal of H.R. 449 is to provide many in need with the intended benefits of bankruptcy: a fresh start. But the relief will likely come to the detriment of many for-profit universities.
In recent months, bankruptcy courts and nonbankruptcy courts have addressed the enforceability of make-whole premiums (“make-wholes”) where borrowers have sought to repay loans prior to maturity, including In re Energy Future Holdings, Inc., et al. (EFH) pending before Judge Christopher S. Sontchi of the U.S.
The last major revision to U.S. business reorganization laws occurred in 1978. In the nearly four decades since then, the markets and financial products, as well as the industry itself, have evolved. Accordingly, ABI established the Commission to Study the Reform of Chapter 11 to evaluate the U.S.
In the January 2015 edition of the ABI Journal, Kathleen Furr and Brett Switzer (hereinafter “the authors”) lauded the decision in In re Rose.[1] In that decision, the court rejected the concept of providing for the vesting of property of a chapter 13 estate in an entity other than the debtor, based solely on state la
[1]Most chapter 7 clients are looking for the quickest and easiest way to discharge their debts, retain or protect their assets and move on with their lives. Difficulties in achieving these results can arise when assets are disclosed or discovered after the bankruptcy filing.
Theoretically, an individual bankruptcy debtor may amend property claimed as exempt on his or her Schedule C at any time until the close of the bankruptcy proceeding.[1] The debtor must give notice of the amendment to the trustee and to “any entity affected thereby,” which is usually all creditors.
Most bankruptcy attorneys are born negotiators. It is part of our DNA to zealously advocate for our client’s position and simultaneously explore options for consensual resolution. Unfortunately, many bankruptcy disputes cannot be resolved this way. Perhaps the client has unrealistic expectations, or perhaps there is a personality conflict between the lawyers and their clients.
Following a nearly-three-year study, on Dec. 8, 2014, the ABI Commission to Study the Reform of Chapter 11 published a 400-page report containing recommendation and principles for policymakers. This article focuses on chapter 11 reform relating to professional retention and compensation.