Courts are reluctant to employ PROMESA as a shield against suits involving government administration.
Most Recent Articles
A chapter 13 plan that improperly modifies a home mortgage remains binding unless the lender has objected to confirmation.
First Amendment doesn’t compel deduction of religious contributions in finding an ‘undue hardship’ justifying the discharge of student loans.
The BAP avoided making a rule that would have allowed convicted felons to discharge student loans more easily than debtors with clean records.
Circuits are split on whether a tax refund presumptively goes to the subsidiary that created the losses giving rise to the refund.
Hiring a collection agent will not insulate a debt buyer from liability under the FDCPA.
The appeals court didn’t allow an ambiguous state statute to confer absolution for violating the automatic stay.
Lack of a circuit split makes equitable mootness an unlikely topic for Supreme Court review.
‘Old’ GM lenders lose again while attempting to avoid the consequences of a $1.5 billion mistake.
Supreme Court has three bankruptcy cases this term, on nonjudicial foreclosure, trademark rejection, and contempt for a stay violation.
Lying about herpes resulted in a nondischargeable debt for fraud and battery.
The government doesn’t violate the automatic stay by refusing to reinstate a driver’s license suspended for failure to pay traffic fines, Judge Surratt-States says.
High court will resolve a circuit split dating back to the Fourth Circuit’s controversial Lubrizol opinion in 1985.
Already primed to rule on nonjudicial foreclosure, the Supreme Court might take cases involving contempt, the automatic stay and trademarks.
Defining collateral by reference in a UCC-1 is held invalid in Puerto Rico’s bankruptcy.
The Third and Seventh Circuits agree on a concept that limits a debtor’s ability to recover accrued Social Security benefits that are set off before bankruptcy.
Venue in the bankruptcy court is ok for suits brought under a liquidating plan.
A bankruptcy court’s in rem jurisdiction overrides a claim of sovereign immunity.
Firm allowed to drop a creditor-client and represent the debtor in chapter 11.
Ten years later, courts are still sorting out who’s liable for Old GM’s failure to disclose a known defect.
District and bankruptcy courts reach diametrically different results on identical facts regarding the same defective medical device.