As the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (the Act) works through its rebellious teenage years, courts continue to address debtor behavior through the provisions of the Act impacting the applicability of the automatic stay.
November 2021 brought with it a first-of-its-kind, incredibly successful event with ABI’s Consumer Practice Extravaganza Nov. 3-12 (CPEX21). Attendees learned about all aspects of consumer bankruptcy practice from intake to post-filing, and from basic chapter 7 cases to cryptocurrency.
The Second Circuit’s August 2021 decision in In re Gravel[1] has already received considerable attention and generated much debate. Gravel involved the Vermont bankr
Co-Chairs Chris Hawkins and Michelle Bass thank all committee members for their support and participation this year.
In City of Chicago v.
In July, the Second Circuit issued an opinion favoring the dischargeability of certain private student loans in what appears to be a growing circuit trend. This trend correlates with the call for student loan reform, which has been at the forefront of the news in recent months.
The childhood riposte “none of your beeswax” has some legal analogs; among them is the doctrine of standing. Standing limits the scope of legal rules, including the automatic stay.
In a pair of decisions, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of Texas took on two fundamental issues arising in an adversary proceeding for nondischargeability concerning a judgment for defamation arising out of alleged sexual misconduct. In Joseph Mazzara v.
February 2020 brought some good news for borrowers hoping to discharge their student loans in bankruptcy with Judge Cecelia Morris’s decision in Rosenberg v. N.Y. State Higher Educ. Servs.
On March 25, 2021, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a chapter 7 discharge prohibits the holders of a nondischargeable debt from suing the debtor post-discharge to collect a judgment. Specifically, the ruling in Suvicmon Dev. Inc. v.