The Dallas Court of Appeals has published a new decision correctly applying the doctrines of judicial estoppel and standing relating to a cause of action omitted from a bankruptcy filing. Norris v. Brookshire Grocery Company, ___. S.W.3d ___ (Tex. App.--Dallas, 2/29/12, no pet.). You can find the opinion here.In Norris, the plaintiff filed suit against Brookshire Grocery prior to filing bankruptcy. Upon filing bankruptcy, the plaintiff/debtor neglected to mention the suit in either the Schedules or the Statement of Financial Affairs. However, just thirteen days after filing bankruptcy, the debtors filed a motion to dismiss their bankruptcy case on the ground that they "desire to work a payout with creditors." No party objected and the case was dismissed.After the bankruptcy case was dismissed, Brookshire moved for summary judgment based on judicial estoppel and lack of standing. The trial court granted the motion. On appeal the Dallas Court of Appeals reversed finding:1. In order for judicial estoppel to apply, the Bankruptcy Court must have "actually accepted" the debtors' non-disclosure of the asset. Where the debtors dismissed their case without receiving a discharge, there was not an opportunity for the bankruptcy court to "actually accept" their position.2. Normally, an undisclosed asset remains property of the bankruptcy estate and is not abandoned when the trustee closes the case. This is not the case when the case is dismissed, since the estate ceases to exist. As a result, the debtors had standing to pursue their cause of action.The opinion by the Dallas Court of Appeals should be commended for correctly applying difficult principles of bankruptcy law. The purpose of judicial estoppel is to prevent debtors from gaming the system and reaping a benefit from taking inconsistent positions. Reading between the lines, it seems likely that when debtors' counsel learned of the cause of action, he gave them a choice: proceed with the bankruptcy and lose the cause of action or dismiss the bankruptcy and keep the cause of action. Because the debtors effectively undid the omission by dismissing their bankruptcy, judicial estoppel did not apply.Hat tip to St. Clair Newbern.

Tax refunds in a Chapter 13 are handle somewhat different than in a Chapter 7. We know, in a Chapter 7, as long as you received and spend your refund before filing, or are able to exempt your refund, then the trustee does not take it. In a Chapter 13 if you have already received and spent your refund before filing, the trustee cannot take it. However, exemptions cannot be used in a Chapter 13 to protect an anticipated refund. The entire time you are in a Chapter 13 bankruptcy, between 36-60 months), any refund over $600, or 2x your plan payment amount (whichever is less) is to be turned over to the trustee. If however, unanticipated expenses have occurred after the filing of the bankruptcy and you need to keep this money for a specific purpose we can file a Motion to Retain Tax Refund. In order to do this, you must provide your attorney with copies of bills, estimates, etc. showing the amounts you need to retain the refund for. Acceptable uses of the tax refund are medical bills from AFTER filing, car repairs, unexpected home repairs, and so on. It cannot be kept to pay things that are already allotted in your budget like utilities, rent, or even getting caught up on your Ch 13 plan payments. All of these expenses are already accounted for in your budget and therefore the trustee will not allow you to retain additional money to pay these creditors. Once you have provided your attorney with this document, we file the motion and then wait 21 days to see if the trustee objections. If not objections are filed, then an order is submitted to the court. Once granted, you can spend the tax refund on the approved expenses. If however, an objection is filed, your attorney can work with you to correct the issues. If the issues are not resolved and the order is not granted, you must turn the tax refund over to the trustee. So let’s say you do not have any additional expenses and do not need the refund. What happens to it once you send it in to the trustee? Does the trustee get to keep it? No. The money is spread out proportionally to all of your unsecured creditors.

Starting in September of each year, when clients come in asking about bankruptcy one of the questions we ask is whether the prospective client expects to receive a tax refund for the upcoming tax year. If the answer is yes, we ask how much. For a Chapter 7 for example, if someone comes in and says they expect a $4,000 tax refund and they want their bankruptcy filed on September 1st (the 244th day of the year), we explain that 244/365 about 67% ($2,673.97) of the tax refund for the next year is part of the bankruptcy estate. Does this mean the trustee automatically gets over $2600 of this client’s refund? No. The court gives you certain exemptions to keep property, including money in a bank account or an expected tax refund. The amount of these exemptions vary case by case depending on whether you are head of household and whether you have dependents under the age of 18. This is something that you will need to consult your attorney about to determine for your specific case how much could be protected. So lets say the client expects $4000. This client is not head of household and does not have any dependents. The amount that could be protected would be limited to a $600 wildcard exemption. This client may want to wait to file the bankruptcy after they have received and spent their tax refund. Once it is spent, we no longer need to exempt it and the trustee cannot take it. However, if this is the route you chose to go, it is important to be cautious of what you are spending the money on. You cannot make payments to family members or friends and do not want to pay any creditor more than $600. You can however pay normal expenses: rent, utilities, necessities for yourself or dependents, etc. If you are not sure whether the bills you plan to pay with your tax refund and acceptable, contact your bankruptcy attorney. 

A married person can file bankruptcy without their spouse.  If a person files bankruptcy individually, it will not negatively affect their spouse or their spouse's credit.  However, if there are joint debts, the filing spouse's liability for the debt will be eliminated, but the non-filing spouse can still be held liable for the debt and may be pursued by creditors.  In that case, the non-filing spouse's credit may be affected.  If there are joint debts, it probably would be beneficial to file a joint bankruptcy so both parties' liability for the debt is eliminated.  In that case, any debt in joint names or any debt in each party's individual names would be discharged through the bankruptcy. If a person's spouse only has debt that is not able to be discharged, such as student loans, certain taxes, alimony, child support, etc., or secured debts they are current on and wish to keep, they can continue to make those payments without needing to file bankruptcy.  They do not need to file jointly just because they are on certain secured debts together.  Secured debts are those that are protected by collateral, such as a house or a car.  For instance, if both spouses' names are on a car loan or a mortgage and the loan or mortgage is current and the property is going to be retained, both spouses do not need to file just because their name is on the property jointly.  However, if both spouses do not file, and the loan or mortgage becomes delinquent, or the property is foreclosed or repossessed, the non-filing spouse would then be responsible for the deficiency. Additionally, if a person files without their spouse, their spouse would not be included in the bankruptcy, but their income would be included for purposes of determining median income as long as the married couple is living together.  That is based on the assumption that if a married couple is living in the same house, they are sharing income and expenses.  If you have any questions regarding this material or bankruptcy in general and would like to meet with a St. Louis or St. Charles bankruptcy attorney, please contact us at 636-916-5400.

Joining the majority position, U.S. District Judge Walter Smith has ruled that inherited IRA accounts may be exempted as "retirement funds" under 11 U.S.C. Sec. 522(d)(12). Hill v. Studensky, No. W-11-CA-00214 (W.D. Tex. 2/22/12), which can be found here. (PACER registration required).The issue on appeal was whether an inherited IRA continued to constitute "retirement funds" once the person for whose retirement they had been saved was no longer alive. The Court found that there were two elements to be satisfied: (1) whether the account contained "retirement funds"; and (2) whether the funds were exempt from taxation. When an IRA is inherited, the beneficiary may receive the funds immediately, in which case they are recognized as ordinary income. Alternatively, they may be transferred to a new trustee. The account will still be in the name of the decedent and the beneficiary must begin receiving distributions within one year or withdraw the entire amount within five years. Turning to the issue of whether the inherited IRA constituted "retirement funds," the Court noted that both parties' interpretations were reasonable. However, section (d)(12)'s relation to the other subsections of section 522(d) proved important. The other subsections of section 522(d) referred to the debtor's interest in property, but section 522(d)(12) did not. The issue of inherited IR As is presently pending before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Eastern District of Texas reached the same result as Judge Smith in Chilton v. Moser, No. 4:10-CV-180 (E.D. Tex. 3/16/11). The case is pending before the Fifth Circuit as Case No. 11-40377, Chilton v. Moser. The case was argued before the panel on February 8, 2012.

If you are considering filing for bankruptcy you probably have a number of questions about what creditors must be listed and what payments you can make in the months leading up to bankruptcy.  Clients may have a number of reasons for wanting to exclude creditors, including wanting to keep and ongoing business or personal relationship with a particular creditor.  However, when filing for bankruptcy you are required to list every debt owed.  You may not pick and choose what to include in your bankruptcy petition.  The next natural question is can you pay off the debt prior to filing for bankruptcy to keep it out of your petition.  The answer depends on the nature and the amount of the debt.  Any payment to a friend or family member in the year leading up to bankruptcy can be reversed by the trustee.  This is because any payment to a friend or family member is automatically presumed to be fraudulent by the court.  You will want to avoid this type of payment, even if you are paying back an amount borrowed from that individual.  Payments to ordinary creditors, meaning not friends or family, should not exceed $600 in the months leading up to bankruptcy However, if your minimum payment is over $600, for example if your mortgage is $1,000, you may pay what is actually owed.  The idea is that the bankruptcy code is written so that debtors may not try to exclude certain creditors from the bankruptcy or give any creditor preferential treatment.  If you do make a payment of more than $600 the trustee may reverse the payment and make that payment a part of your bankruptcy. It is true that if you file bankruptcy and name certain creditors they make cancel your accounts or not do business with you in the future.  Unfortunately, they still must be listed.  There are a few options that may be available.  You may choose to voluntarily repay the debt after the bankruptcy is closed if you choose.  However, doing this will eliminate some of the benefit that filing for bankruptcy offers as you will not truly be starting over.  There are a number of creditors that specialize in working with people that have filed for bankruptcy and can get you on the right start to improving your credit.  If you still have questions, or would like to speak with a St. Louis Bankruptcy Attorney, call us today!

    My call to the inept bankruptcy practitioners to get better or get out spawned some surprising push back. I spoke bluntly about what I saw as harm to the public from less than competent or committed bankruptcy attorneys. Most reaction was supportive:  A trustee wanted to use the piece for a presentation he was making; another lawyer asked to reprint it.  Many simply added their voice to my call. But I got two very heated, negative responses. The Arrogance Of A Helping Hand The first is easier to understand:  this reader thought I was arrogant.  I suppose he finds arrogance  in my willingness to name the performances I saw as sub par and to protest publicly when client cases are dismissed for the lawyer’s  failings.  Should that offend?  What obligates us to sit by in silence? It does make me wonder what that attorney, a certified specialist in consumer bankruptcy law, is doing to help people in his area become better at their craft.  Does he sit with practitioners and assist in the crafting of plans?  Does he educate his colleagues about new developments in the law? I suspect that he does nothing, sitting idly by as the next generation of bankruptcy lawyers circles the drain with their hapless clients in tow. To this lawyer I say, “If you’re not helping, get out of the way of those who do.” Scheming For Someone’s Clients The second retort was more disturbing in some ways.  The reader attributed the observed incompetence to competition among lawyers that ran counter, he thought, to the idea of a profession. He saw my criticism as being borne of a desire to take the bumbler’s clients, and contended that as profession we should be circling the wagons around the less-stellar members and nurturing them. After all, he claimed, we are a profession, not a business. This lawyers doesn’t know me personally, nor does he know my firm.  He has no sense of whether we’re booked solid or begging for business. I personally find it reprehensible for a professional to speak poorly of another attorney with the intent to steal his or her clients.  And you certainly can’t make the case that I’m confronting those lawyers who sparked this dialogue  with an eye on their clients because, like at most CLE presentations, the people who could really benefit aren’t reading here. Most disturbing in this angry comment was the unstated proposition that we, as a profession, should be protecting the least among us from criticism or consequence of their ineptitude.  Reminds me of the conspiracy-of-silence charge against professions, where no member of the profession can be found to testify for the victim of the defendant professional. Yes, this is a profession.  One dedicated not only to profit but to assisting people who need it most.  By coddling those who bumble through in the face of proffered education, we are allowing them to sacrifice the best interests of their clients at the altar of their profit.  And that, gentle reader, is abhorrent. Part of being a profession is having a duty to the calling as well as to the client. A Call To Action The experienced attorneys need to take up the mantle, make themselves available to mentor,  and point out educational opportunities for inexperienced bankruptcy attorneys.  Immediately. In my local case, the bench and the trustee’s office had labored mightily to educate the bar on the new procedures.  The local bar associations and the Bankruptcy Forum run classes all over California. The National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys runs two programs each year.  The American Bankruptcy Institute puts on many programs, some of them dedicated to consumer issues. I offer educational opportunities, both live and online.  So do other lawyers and private groups, some of them excellent. A lawyer who remains clueless in the face of such educational opportunities should be pointed in the right direction.  If he or she fails to get the hint, permission to practice before the bankruptcy court should be revoked.  It may sound harsh, but we are a helping profession; a failure to help is a danger to those we are here to protect. What do you think?  As a profession, what should be our attitude be toward the less competent?  As a specialty within a profession, are the rules in bankruptcy practice any different? Image courtesy of Steve Snodgrass.

Do I have to appear in front of a Judge for my bankruptcy? No. The Judge does oversee the bankruptcy process; however you are not required to appear in front of him. Depending on your specific case, your attorney may need to appear in front of the Judge for certain motions or objections that may arise, but you do not need to attend. So do I have to go to court at all for my bankruptcy? Yes. One time during your bankruptcy you are required to appear in front of a trustee who has been assigned to your case. This appearance is often referred to as the “meeting of creditors”. What happens at the meeting of creditors?  The meeting of creditors is required under 11 USC §341 of the United States Code. This meeting is required in order to receive your discharge under both Chapter 7 and Chapter 13 bankruptcies. At the meeting the trustee will ask you questions under oath. There are some required questions and other questions will be asked depending on what you have listed on your petition, schedules, statements, and related documents. Generally, the questions are aimed towards verifying information you have listed (i.e. Are all of your creditors listed? Is your income still the same at it was on the date the petition was filed?). If you were honest and reviewed for accuracy your documents before they were filled with the court, then you will have nothing to worry about at this meeting. Are my creditors going to show up and tell me that I have to pay them back? Yes and no. Can creditors show up at your meeting of creditors? Yes, but they usually do not. Even if some of your creditors do show up, they cannot come and tell you to pay them back. Their appearance is permitted to allow them to ask you questions about your income, assets, etc. Again however, appearance by creditors is rare. Who is the trustee and what does he do? The trustee is appointed by the United States trustee, an officer of the Department of Justice, who oversees the bankruptcy. The trustees’ role is to determine whether there are assets that can be liquidated for the creditors’ benefit. They are essential appointed to make sure your bankruptcy complies with the bankruptcy code and that you have disclosed all income and property and that those items do not exceed that which is allowed in the bankruptcy in order to receive a discharge. In Closing…. The meeting is nothing to be worried about. If you have been thorough and completed your forms honestly and accurately, then this will be a breeze. Show up on time with your ID and SS card and the rest is easy!

By Prashant Gopal - Feb 7, 2012 Banks, accelerating efforts to movetroubled mortgages off their books, are offering as much as$35,000 or more in cash to delinquent homeowners to sell theirproperties for less than they owe. Lenders have routinely delayed or blocked suchtransactions, known as short sales, in which they accept lessfrom a buyer than the seller’s outstanding loan. Now banks havedecided the deals are faster and less costly than foreclosures,which have slowed in response to regulatory probes of abusivepractices. Banks are nudging potential sellers by pre-approvingdeals, streamlining the closing process, forgoing their right topursue unpaid debt and in some cases providing large cashincentives, said Bill Fricke, senior credit officer for Moody’sInvestors Service in New York. Losses for lenders are about 15 percent lower on the salesthan on foreclosures, which can take years to complete whiletaxes and legal, maintenance and other costs accumulate,according to Moody’s. The deals accounted for 33 percent offinancially distressed transactions in November, up from 24percent a year earlier, said CoreLogic Inc., a Santa Ana,California-based real estate information company. Karen Farley hadn’t made a mortgage payment in a year whenshe got what looked like a form letter from her lender. “You could sell your home, owe nothing more on yourmortgage and get $30,000,” JP Morgan Chase & Co. (JPM) said in theAug. 17 letter obtained by Bloomberg News. $200,000 Short Farley, whose home construction lending business dried upafter the housing crash, said the New York-based bank agreed tolet her sell her San Marcos, California, home for $592,000 --about $200,000 less than what she owes. The $30,000 will covermoving costs and the rental deposit for her next home. Farley,who is also approved for an additional $3,000 through a federalincentive program, is scheduled to close the deal Feb. 10. “I wondered, why would they offer me something, and whywouldn’t they just give me the boot?” Farley, 65, said in atelephone interview. “Instead, I’m getting money.” Tom Kelly, a JP Morgan spokesman, declined to comment on thecompany’s incentives. “When a modification is not possible, a short saleproduces a better and faster result for the homeowner, theinvestor and the community than a foreclosure,” he said in ane-mail. A mountain of pending repossessions is holding back arecovery in the housing market, where prices have fallen for sixstraight years, and damping economic growth. Owners of more than14 million homes are in foreclosure, behind on their mortgagesor owe more than their properties are worth, said RealtyTracInc., a property-data company in Irvine, California. Foreclosure Holdouts Short sales represented 9 percent of all U.S. residentialtransactions in November, the most recent month for which datais available, up from 2 percent in January 2008, according toCorelogic. Bank-owned foreclosures and short sales sold at adiscount of 34 percent to non-distressed properties in the thirdquarter, according to RealtyTrac. As lenders shift their focus to sales, they are findingthat some borrowers would rather risk repossession while theywait for a loan modification, according to Guy Cecala, publisherof Inside Mortgage Finance, a trade journal. In a loanmodification, the monthly payment, and sometimes principal, isreduced to help prevent seizure. Homeowners facing foreclosuremay live rent-free for years before they are forced out. “That’s why the banks have got to pay the big bucks,”Cecala said. “The real question is why is the bribe so big? Isthat what it takes to get somebody out of their home?” Multiple Banks Banks also pay a few thousand dollars to the owners ofsecond liens, whose loans can be wiped out by a short sale, toencourage them not to block the deals. While JP Morgan is giving the largest incentive payments,other banks and mortgage investors are also offering them,according to interviews with 12 real estate agents in Arizona,California, Florida, New York and Washington. Lenders alsoprovide incentives on loans they service and don’t own when themortgage investor, such as a hedge fund, requests it. JP Morgan, the biggest U.S. bank, approves about 5,000 shortsales a month. It generally offers $10,000 to $35,000 in cashpayments at settlement, real estate agents said. Not all of thesales include incentives. Borrowers also can receive payments from the federalgovernment’s Home Affordable Foreclosure Alternatives program,which in 2010 began offering as much as $1,500 to servicers,$2,000 to investors and $3,000 to homeowners who complete shortsales. Quicker Resolution For banks, approving a sale for less than is owed on thehome can cut a year or more off the time it takes to unload aproperty. From listing to sale, the transactions took about 123days on average at the end of last year, according to theCampbell/Inside Mortgage Finance HousingPulse Tracking Survey. Lenders spend an average of 348 days to foreclose in theU.S. and an additional 175 days to sell the property, accordingto RealtyTrac. In New York, a state that requires court approvalfor repossessions, it takes about four years to foreclose on ahome and then resell it, the company said. Lenders can often afford to forgive debt, offer theincentive and still make a profit because they purchased theloan from another bank at a discount, said Trent Chapman, aRealtor who trains brokers and attorneys to negotiate with banksfor short sales. Chapman, who also writes a blog on TheShortSaleGenius.com,said he’s heard about 50 homeowners who have received incentivesfrom lenders including JP Morgan, Wells Fargo & Co., CitigroupInc. and Ally Financial Inc. Wells Fargo “My guess is they want to get rid of bad loans,” Chapmansaid. “If they short sale these types of loans, they have lessof a headache and have some goodwill with the homeowner.” Wells Fargo, based in San Francisco, offers relocationassistance of as much as $20,000 for borrowers who completeshort sales or agree to transfer title through a deed in lieu offoreclosure “in certain states with extended foreclosuretimelines, including Florida,” Veronica Clemons, a spokeswoman,said in an e-mail. Bank of America Corp. sent letters to 20,000 Floridahomeowners as part of a pilot program, offering incentives of asmuch as $20,000, or 5 percent of the unpaid loan balance, Jumana Bauwens, a spokeswoman, said in an e-mail. The program expiredin December and the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank hasn’tdecided whether to introduce it in other states, she said. About15 percent of the homeowners agreed to participate in theprogram, she said. Citigroup Offers “The bank is pleased with the response,” Bauwens wrote.“The state is experiencing higher foreclosure rates than otherparts of the country and is therefore seen as a viable market togauge incremental short-sale response and completion rates whenpresenting homeowners with relocation assistance at closing.” Citigroup offers $3,000 to most borrowers who qualify forits program, but the “amount may increase based on thecircumstances of each individual case,” Mark Rodgers, aspokesman for the New York-based bank, said in an e-mail.“Investor programs have different guidelines for relocationincentives, which we honor.” Susan Fitzpatrick, a spokeswoman for Detroit-based Ally,didn’t comment specifically on incentives when asked about them. Borrowers typically can’t negotiate the incentives, whicharrive by mail, Chapman, the Realtor, said. Tap on Shoulder “It’s not really easy to identify the guidelines becauseChase doesn’t tell you, they kind of tap you on the shoulder,”he said. “When I first saw it in January 2011, I thought it wasa joke or a typo. I was convinced it must say $3,000, not$30,000.” Offering enough for the homeowner to put down a deposit ona rental apartment is reasonable, said Sean O’Toole, chiefexecutive officer of ForeclosureRadar.com, which tracks sales offoreclosed properties. Giving tens of thousands of dollars todelinquent homeowners sends the wrong message, particularly ifthey got into trouble by running up home-equity loans during thehousing boom, he said. “It may make sense for people to walk away, it doesn’tmake sense for them to get rewarded for doing it,” O’Toolesaid. “It’s not the homeowner’s fault that house prices droppedso dramatically, but they have already received months of freerent, if not cash out.” Cecala of Inside Mortgage Finance said he wonders whetherlenders are making big payments on properties with underlyingtitle problems. Evan Berlin, managing partner of Berlin Patten,a real estate law firm in Sarasota, Florida, saidrepresentatives of a large bank told him the incentives areprimarily given to borrowers when it doesn’t have the properpaperwork needed to win its foreclosure case. He declined toname the bank for publication. Incentive Disconnect State attorneys general across the U.S. began investigatingforeclosure practices in October 2010 following allegations thatthe nation’s top mortgage servicers were using faulty documentsto repossess homes. Berlin said his office negotiated about 400 short sales inthe past year and about a quarter included an incentive, rangingfrom $3,000 to $48,000. In some cases, the payments aren’tincentives at all because they’re offered after the borrower hasalmost completed the short sale, he said. “The idea is that this is relocation assistance,” Berlinsaid. “But when you’re offering $48,000, obviously it doesn’tcost $48,000 to relocate.” Cooperation Sought The size of the payment may have little to do with salesprice. JP Morgan gave one Phoenix homeowner $20,000 after shesold her property in June for $32,000, according to RoyceHauger, the real estate agent who represented the seller andshared a copy of the settlement sheet with Bloomberg News. Thebank also agreed to forgive more than $70,000 in debt, she said. Kelly, the JP Morgan spokesman, declined to comment on thepayment. The homeowners are getting the money in exchange for theircooperation, said Kris Pilles, a Riverhead, New York-based realestate broker who represents banks, servicers and hedge fundsthat own distressed housing debt. Pilles is frequently dispatched to the homes of delinquentborrowers to explain the benefits of avoiding foreclosure, hesaid. His clients have paid as much as $92,500. In return, thelenders expect the seller to clean the house before showings,and trim the grass. “Money talks,” Pilles said. “From the bank side, it’sanything to initiate a conversation with someone who may not belistening to them.” ®2012 BLOOMBERG L.P. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

If you are considering filing for bankruptcy for a business there area number of options available to you.  First you would need toconsider what type of liability you have.  If you are a soleproprietor or a general partner you are personally responsible for thedebt.  If you are a limited partner, have an interest in acorporation, or you have an interest in a limited liability companyyou are generally not personally responsible for the debt.  However,there can be exceptions to this where an individual has personallyguaranteed the debt of a company or the corporate veil can be pierced. Prior to filing for bankruptcy you will want to consult with theattorney that handled the start up of your business. Filling for a Chapter 7 differs, depending on the type of business youhave.  If you are a sole proprietor you cannot file for bankruptcysolely for the business.  In this case you would need to filepersonally and list the business.   This is because a soleproprietorship is not a separate legal entity and is not consideredseparate from you personally.  If, however, you have a partnership,corporation, or limited liability corporation you may file on behalfof the business and are not required to file for bankruptcypersonally. If you have a sole proprietorship and are required to file personally,both personal debts and business debts will be eliminated throughfilling.  You can use exemptions available in personal bankruptcyfilings to exempt both personal and business property, though the samelimits and rules still apply.  The debt will be discharged and you canstill operate your business.  This is a very good option if you wouldlike to save your business.  Of course, if you do not want to continueyour business you may choose to surrender assets and begin winding upyour business. If you have a partnership, corporation, or limited liability companyand file on behalf of your business filing for bankruptcy willdissolve the business.  Upon filing you would need to begin winding upaffairs.  You could not enter into any new business, but could finishexisting obligations to the extent possible.  Assets would beliquidated to pay off creditors.  The business debt is not dischargedand you cannot apply any exemptions that would be available in anindividual filing.  This would not eliminate any personal obligationon debts incurred by making a personal guarantee of piercing thecorporate veil.  However, if you do have some personal obligation onthe business debts you can also file for a personal bankruptcy toeliminate your obligation.If you have any questions, or would like a free consultation with aSt. Louis Bankruptcy Attorney, contact us today!