(W.D. Ky. April 25, 2017)
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently reversed a ruling that disallowed an unsecured creditor’s claim filed in a California bankruptcy court based on the forum state’s statute of limitations.
In so ruling, the Ninth Circuit held that, although courts typically apply the forum state’s statute of limitations if the contract is silent on the issue, exceptional circumstances warranted the application of a longer statute of limitations here, because the creditor had no option but to enforce its claim in the forum based on where the bankruptcy petition was filed.
(6th Cir. B.A.P. April 17, 2017)
(6th Cir. B.A.P. April 17, 2017)
The Sixth Circuit B.A.P reverses the bankruptcy court’s order granting the U.S. Trustee a second extension of the deadline to file a nondischargeability complaint and reverses the subsequent judgment denying the debtor a Chapter 7 discharge. The court finds that the U.S. Trustee failed to establish sufficient cause for an additional extension under Bankruptcy Rule 4004(b). Opinion below.
Judge: Harrison
Attorneys for U.S. Trustee: Amy L. Good, Scott Robert Belhorn, Sharon Nollsch
Attorney for Debtor: Lee Raymond Kravitz
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit recently held that a court cannot extinguish a secured creditor’s state-law security interests for failure to file a proof of claim during the administration of an equity receivership over entities involved in a Ponzi scheme.
A copy of the opinion in Securities and Exchange Commission v. Wells Fargo Bank is available at: Link to Opinion.
(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Apr. 14, 2017)
The court grants the debtor’s motion for a hardship discharge under 11 U.S.C. § 1328(b)(1). The debtor had made 44 plan payments but was unable to make the 16 remaining payments. The court finds the recent change in the debtor’s economic circumstances warranted the relief requested. Opinion below.
Judge: Carr
Attorney for Debtor: Steven P. Taylor
(Bankr. W.D. Ky. Apr. 11, 2017)
(Bankr. S.D. Ind. Apr. 13, 2017)
Following trial, the bankruptcy court enters judgment against the debtor, finding the loan debt owed to the bank is nondischargeable under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(2)(B). The court finds that the debtor made false representations with respect to his ownership interest in real property and the existence of a debt owed, which representations were reasonably relied upon by the bank when making the loan. Opinion below.
Judge: Carr
Attorneys for Plaintiff: Riley Bennett & Egloff, LLP, Anthony R. Jost
Attorney for Defendant: KC Cohen
(Bankr. E.D. Ky. Apr. 13, 2017)
(Bankr. E.D. Ky. Apr. 10, 2017)
The bankruptcy court grants in part and denies in part the defendant lender’s motion to compel arbitration of claims asserted in the debtor’s complaint. The court first finds that the arbitration agreement is valid and that the claims are within its scope. The court then holds that, for certain claims, arbitration would conflict with the underlying purposes of the bankruptcy code. Thus, those claims remain with the bankruptcy court, while the other claims are to be arbitrated. Opinion below.
Judge: Wise