Consumer Bankruptcy

Members of the committee The second part of the 2009 Atlanta Consumer Bankruptcy Skills Training was held on June 4 at the State Bar of Georgia headquarters in Atlanta.  The ABI collaborated with the Bankruptcy Section of the Atlanta Bar Association and the Metro-Atlanta Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys Group to present the program.  This year’s educational lineup was developed to provide attendees with an interactive learning experience led by a faculty of prominent bankruptcy judges as well as experienced practitioners. 

The Bankruptcy Code specifically provides for adjustments of current monthly income or expenses due to "special circumstances," but in order to qualify, there must be "no reasonable alternative." The Code sets forth a test, placing the burden of proof on the debtor to determine if a requested adjustment qualifies as a special circumstance: "In order to establish special circumstances, the debtor shall be required to itemize each additional expense or adjustment to income; and to provide (1) documentation for such expense or adjustment to income and (2) a detailed explanation of the special circumstances that make such expenses or adjustment to income necessary and reasonable."

There have been an increasing number of cases dealing with objections to assigned credit card debt. These cases are a bit like a showdown between gunfighters with bad aim; there is a lot of shooting, but no one hits anything. While a gunfight where no one gets shot is a good thing, the court must still decide whether to allow or disallow the claim even when there is little or no evidence introduced. As a result, rules on presumptions and burden of proof often dictate the result. 

The Fifth Circuit recently affirmed a district court decision that had affirmed a bankruptcy court's decision to adjudge a debt nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C.

Recently, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of New York, in a combined treatment of two chapter 7 cases involving the same trustee and debtor's attorney, penalized the attorney for delaying the cases and failing to comply with the  supplemental reporting requirements of Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2016(b).[1] The debtor's attorney refused to appear to defend against the trustee's motion for turnover of assets unless he was compensated by additional fees.

Bankruptcy courts addressing the issue of whether debtors may deduct college expenses for their adult children post-BAPCPA have found no statutory support for such deduction. The Bankruptcy Code allows deductions for some education expenses, but limits deductions for elementary and secondary education expenses. While the Code allows debtors to deduct expenses for contributions to family members, it is limited to elderly, chronically ill or disabled family members. College expenses for adult children do not fall into these statutory provisions and therefore are not supported under BAPCPA.

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Idaho recently sustained a chapter 7 trustee's objection to a creditor's motion for relief from the automatic stay pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §362(d).[1] Under circumstances of serial assignment of an interest that are more the rule in real property mortgage lending than the exception, the court found that the movant failed to show its standing as the real party in interest, with a pecuniary interest or at least an actual stake in the outcome, able to press its cause.

The House Judiciary Committee approved an amendment in the nature of a substitute for H.R.

This legacy article may contain broken links. For the latest from ABI, visit https://www.abi.org/membership/committees/consumer-bankruptcy

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (BAPCPA) added a new provision regarding personal property leases, §365(p), which provides: