11th Circuit

The Supreme Court’s narrowing of Rooker-Feldman is showing up in circuit court opinions.

District court rules that proceeds from a postpetition personal injury claim are ‘additional disposable income’ that ordinarily goes to creditors in a chapter 13 plan.

Taggart doesn’t give more protection to a purchaser of debt than it does to the original creditor, Judge Scott Grossman says.

Rooker-Feldman is applied narrowly these days and isn’t a substitute for collateral estoppel.

Title lenders continue losing battles to take cars away from debtors, but the lenders have yet to plead and prove their best cases.

The lawsuit was under federal law, not state law, even though Section 544(b)(1) incorporated state fraudulent transfer law.

Two judges in Georgia say that personal property is not exempt even if the purchase was traceable to Social Security benefits.

Rather than invoking the best interests and disposable income tests for plan confirmation, the Eleventh Circuit may have departed from the statute by ruling that the ‘ability to pay’ gives postpetition tort claims to creditors in chapter 13.

Although the automatic stay does not require turning over property garnished before bankruptcy, a creditor may not continue garnishing property after filing, Judge Burgess says.

Ruling the other way would have barred chapter 13 filings after renewing title loans.