Automatic Stay

“ In Rem Relief” as Commandeering? Perspectives from Haaland By Nate Juster 1 Is it unconstitutional to force states to record in rem bankruptcy court orders as charges against real property? It could be. In Haaland v. Brackeen , 2 the U.S. Supreme Court considered

A repeat filer in chapter 13 must show ‘clear and convincing evidence’ of improved financial condition to warrant an extension of the automatic stay under Section 362(c)(3)(B), Chief Judge Taddonio says.

Benchnotes By Aaron M. Kaufman, Bradley D. Pack and Christina Sanfelippo Bankruptcy Court Limits Bartenwerfer to Partnership or Agency Debts, Finding It Inapplicable to Fraudulent-Transferee Liability Can the recipient of a fraudulent transfer discharge the claim in

A secured lender who doesn’t file a claim doesn’t get paid by the chapter 13 plan and keeps its lien, but can’t reclaim the collateral during the life of the plan.

A BAP strictly enforced the stay against a mortgage servicer who improperly listed a pre-petition debt in the portion of the monthly statement showing the next post-petition payment.

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.

Although collecting a ‘DSO’ from non-estate property is permitted by Section 362(b)(2)(B), a district judge says that an in personam suit against the debtor can violate the automatic stay.

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

Benchnotes By Aaron M. Kaufman, Bradley D. Pack and Christina Sanfelippo Failures by Debtors’ Counsel to Disclose Fee Arrangements “Will Not Be Taken Lightly” In In re Dordevic, 1 counsel for the debtor disclosed that the debtor paid counsel $5,000 for services in