Mortgage

5th Circuit Jan 28, 2025

A Disguised Loan Agreement Didn’t Create a ‘Fair Ground of Doubt’ Under Taggart

The Fifth Circuit undertook a legal analysis of a complex loan agreement to decide there was no ‘fair ground of doubt’ under Taggart that the lender was violating the discharge injunction.
9th Circuit Jan 24, 2025

Debtors Have a Narrow Window in ‘13’ to Redeem Foreclosed Property, BAP Says

Because a right of redemption does not give rise to a claim, Section 1322(b) doesn’t enable a debtor to redeem foreclosed property when the right of redemption has expired.
2nd Circuit Connecticut Dec 20, 2024

A Mortgage Deficiency Judgment Is a Judicial Lien Subject to Avoidance Under § 522(f)

A deficiency judgment resulting from mortgage foreclosure is not ‘a judgment arising out of a mortgage foreclosure’ and can be avoided as a judgment lien.

A Consensual Judgment Is a Judgment Lien Subject to Avoidance Under Section 522(f)

‘Obtained by’ legal proceedings, a consent judgment is still a judgment lien that can be avoided if it impairs an exemption.

Giving Debtors Their Fair Shake: What Happens to Nonexempt Equity Increases in Debtors’ Homes in Converted Chapter 7 Cases

Giving Debtors Their Fair Shake: What Happens to Nonexempt Equity Increases in Debtors’ Homes in Converted Chapter 7 Cases By Andrew Bates 1 Following decisions from the Eighth and Ninth Circuits, chapter 13 filers could find themselves in a difficult predicament

4th Circuit Maryland Oct 30, 2024

Barring Use of an Online Payment Platform Was an Automatic Stay Violation

Bankruptcy Judge Michelle Harner decided that a mortgage servicer must allow a chapter 13 debtor’s continued use of an online payment platform.

Two Courts Rule on Chapter 7 Debtors’ Standing for Objections to Sales and Claims

Virginia’s Judge Keith Phillips sides with courts that bar lenders from cutting deals with trustees to eliminate debtors’ homestead exemptions.

The Wrath of Res Judicata: A Creditor’s Cautionary Tale

In In re Smith, [1] the Third Circuit reminded consumer bankruptcy practitioners of the wrath of res judicata. The debtor owned an encumbered rental property with an assignment of rents to her mortgage lender. The debtor’s proposed chapter 13 plan included a cramdown of the mortgage lender’s claim that reduced the secured portion of the claim from $150,000 to $95,000 — the value of the collateral. The plan further provided that the payment of rents would pay down the secured portion of the lender’s claim.

The lender objected to the $95,000 cramdown value, the application of rents to the secured portion of its claim, and feasibility. After the bankruptcy court sided with the debtor and held that the rents could pay down the secured portion of the lender’s claim, the lender agreed to the $95,000 cramdown value and abandoned its feasibility objections. The bankruptcy court confirmed the plan.