All posts in Chapter 11

Small Business Task Force – Central District

Email from Chief Judge Maureen Tighe:

Dear Bar Advisory Board members:

As I mentioned at our last meeting, I am seeking nominations for members of a small business task force I am setting up for January 2020.  You may send nominations to the email address below.  The task force will be in furtherance of the court’s goal to be as accessible as possible to business cases.  We will focus in the task force on the small family businesses and other small businesses in the district.  The group will define the term “small business” more as part of its work, but the total liabilities are likely under $3 million.  I will be selecting a broad range of people from around the entire district and encourage you to nominate people with connections to various communities and small business groups in the district, whether or not they have bankruptcy experience.  There will be monthly meetings and community outreach, discussion and report writing involved, so it should be someone able to commit sufficient time to the project.  If you could tell me a little bit about anyone you nominate, that would be helpful.  To give your more guidance, I list the goals of our soon to be final strategic plan below:  Outreach for Businesses. Ensure that businesses know how to appropriately access bankruptcy resources

Strategies:

- Have sufficient outreach and public education to ensure that businesses in financial distress are aware of bankruptcy laws, referral resources, and bankruptcy-related fraudulent schemes
- Investigate and identify barriers that prevent small businesses from accessing court resources
- Maintain and develop relationships with a diverse range of organizations, community groups, and bar associations
- Study the existing business bankruptcy procedures to see whether there are barriers to business access

The recently enacted Small Business Reorganization Act will be considered as part of this task force, as we would like to see that word gets out about this new law and that the court implement it well.  The scope of the task force is broader than the new law, however.  Because the task force likely will not complete its work until late 2020, the Rules Committee we will be addressing separately and much sooner whether any new rule or form changes are required before the Act goes into effect in February.  Judge Scott Clarkson, Chair of the court’s Rules Committee, is currently gathering suggestions from the bar of any changes you believe are required for any of the recently enacted bankruptcy legislation. Please send your comments directly to him at Scott_Clarkson@cacb.uscourts.gov. And send nominations for the Task Force to Email address: CACB_SBTF@cacb.uscourts.gov

Maureen Tighe, Chief Bankruptcy Judge United States Bankruptcy Court,Central District of California

Hard Money Loans in Chapter 11 – CLA Program

California Lawyers Association

Insolvency Law Committee
Hard Money Lending Issues in Bankruptcy
Presented by the Business Law Section Insolvency Law Standing Committee

Tuesday, October 29, 2019

Earn 1 Hour of MCLE Credit. Includes legal specialization, Bankruptcy Law

Alston & Bird
333 S. Hope Street, 16th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Parking will be validated for cars arriving after 5:30 p.m.

Panelists:

Kit Gardner, Law Offices of Kit J. Gardner
Steven Kurtz, Levinson Arshonsky & Kurtz, LLP
Eve Karasik, Levene, Neale, Bender, Yoo & Brill LLP
Honorable Scott H. Yun, United States Bankruptcy Court

Frequently, a business debtor will resort to private, unregulated lenders to finance its operations. The resulting credit facilities are usually easier to obtain than a traditional bank loan, but come with more strings attached. Moreover, the lender is usually far more active in monitoring and protecting its interest in these risky loans. Therefore, when a business files bankruptcy, the debtor is immediately confronted with a host of unique issues that may determine its future survival, and the lender is confronted with the possibility that it will not receive the full benefit of its bargain.

US Trustee has a new mailing address for the quarterly payments

The mailing address for quarterly fee payments that debtors send on or after May 15, 2019, is the following:

United States Trustee Payment Center
P.O. Box 6200-19
Portland, OR 97228-6200

The address shown above is a lockbox at a bank and is for quarterly fee payments only.  Do not use this mailing address for service of process, correspondence, or purposes other than paying quarterly fees.  Any correspondence or documents sent to the lockbox address, other than the payment and payment form, will be destroyed.

ABI Commission Report on Consumer Bk

The ABI Commission just released the report on consumer bankruptcy.  You can find the summary of findings by clicking here.

Some interesting recommendations:  allow for postpetition chapter 7 attorneys fees, get rid of both credit counseling courses for a chapter 7, and increase chapter 13 debt limit to $3 million and eliminate the secured / unsecured distinction.    Interesting stuff in the full report which can be retrieved by registering your email here.  Curious what they will do with your email….

Adjusted Dollar Values – April 1, 2019

I am posting this because I always have a hard time finding the adjusted dollar values. I admit, I stole this from the Eastern District. You can find it by clicking here, and I have pasted a few choice numbers for convenience:

Debt limits for Chapter 13 cases: unsecured, $419,275; secured $1,257,850.

Wages entitled to priority: $13,650.

Definition of a small business: $2,725,625.

Definition of assisted person: $204,425.

Subtle Difference Between “Deemed Exempt” versus “Claimed Exempt” — Just Because Schedule C Lists the $100 in Bank Account Does Not Mean Debtor Can Immediately Use It

I tried to make the title as concise as possible — Ockham’s Razor failed.

Client comes to see you and they have $5,000 in their checking account.  You list it on Schedule B then exempt it on Schedule C and file the case.  The 341(a) is in 30 days.  Client goes to the bank the next day and withdraws all of the funds to pay rent and spend it on gambling.  You don’t think it is a problem because the funds have been fully exempt.

But is it?

In Section 70a of the former Bankruptcy Act, there was an automatic exclusion of exempt property such that by simply listing the asset on Schedule C — then that asset was automatically and immediately exempt.  That is not how it works under the current Code — it is not automatic.  I was reading the Mwangi case from the Ninth Circuit that clarifies a subtle distinction between an asset that has been “claimed exempt” versus one that is actually “deemed exempt.“   In the hypo above, it is a “no harm, no foul” situation but it’s still worth thinking about.

Read more…

Receivership and Bankruptcy

Imagine this, prepetition, Debtor owns and operates 50-unit Apartment upon which Wells Fargo holds a note and deed of trust.  Debtor defaults on the note and WF commences foreclosure.  The state court appoints you Receiver to take possession of and operate the Apartments.  The Apartment is mismanaged and you begin improving the Apartments and collect $100,000 in new rent and the bank, WF, gives you additional funds also in your capacity as Receiver.   As you are running the Apartments and holding onto a substantial amount of funds — debtor files Chapter 11 bankruptcy and orders you, as the Receiver, to turnover the funds to him since it is property of the estate now. So someone is going to have to pull out their checking account to pay for the mess that was created.

Will the court grant Debtor’s Motion for Turnover such that the funds you hold as Receiver have to be turned over to the scumbag Debtor who will likely dissipate the funds?  

Read more…

cdcbaa Program Saturday September 29, 2018 Individual Chapter 11s

Saturday, September 29, 2018

11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.

 Individual Chapter 11 Cases

SPEAKERS:

  • Hon. Neil W. Bason – Central District of California
  • Steven Fox – Law Offices of Steven B. Fox
  • Stella Havkin – Havkin & Shrago
  • Peter M. Lively – Law Office of Peter M. Lively
  • Dennis McGoldrick – Law Office of Dennis McGoldrick

 Topics include Pre-Bankruptcy Planning; “First Day” Motions; Between First Day Motions and Plan Issues; Confirmation and Beyond.

Butner Principle From a Different Perspective – Simon Says May I?

I was reading this law review article on the Butner case and it provided a different view on the case that I wanted to share.  In essence,  Professor Adler questions why Butner  became so famous and a “guiding principle” when the underlying arguments and holdings are so obvious.   Butner says that since the Bankruptcy Code does not establish or define property rights, the parties must turn to nonapplicable law (state law) to answer it.  Well of course! Where else would you turn to!? That makes so much sense, why did we need nine Justices to clarify that?

This is akin to me telling you “in order to fix my plumbing problem, don’t look in the ‘House Operations Manual’ but instead look at the plumbing manual that will tell you how to fix my plumbing problem.“  We need a Supreme Court to tell us that?  The answer is so blatantly obvious let alone to become a “guiding principle!” Read more…

Client Purchased Rolex Before BK? How Courts View “Fraudulent Intent” For Credit Card Fraud

I was reading some case law on fraudulent purchases prior to bankruptcy.  At first I thought it was only “luxury” purchases (i.e. you purchase a Rolex on eve of bankruptcy) but it turns out that “luxury purchase” is just one of many factors.  If you go to McDonald’s everyday and rack up a debt there, that can be nondischargeable.

I read Dougherty and HashemiConsider these factors when advising your client: Read more…