All posts in Courts

5/13/15 – FBA-LA Reception Honoring the Federal Judiciary

By | May 11, 2015 | Bankruptcy Data, Community, Courts, Current Events, Judges Corner, Programs | No comments

Los Angeles Federal Bar Association
Reception Honoring the Federal Judiciary

Come join us in honoring the members of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, United States District Court for the Central District of California, United States Magistrate Judges for the Central District of California and the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California at our Annual Reception Honoring the Federal Judiciary .

Magnificently restored, the former Tower Room is once again the jewel in the crown of Los Angeles City Hall.  The room is atop the City Hall Tower, which rises 27 floors above Spring and Main Streets, and for decades was the tallest structure in Los Angeles.  The restoration of City Hall following the Northridge Earthquake included the ornate ceiling decorations, art deco lighting fixtures, and huge windows looking out to an observation deck with 360 degree views over the city. Following its restoration, the room has been named in honor of Mayor Tom Bradley.

Date:
Wednesday, May 13, 2015
5:00 p.m. – Registration
Program: 5:30 p.m. – 7:30 p.m.

Read more…

My Prediction on Bullard v. Hyde Park Savings Bank was Right Thank You

By | May 11, 2015 | Chapter 13, Supreme Court | No comments

On December 21, 2014, I wrote for the NACTT Academy:

“This seems like a no-brainer to me.  Bankruptcy courts, at least in the Central District of California, deny chapter 13 plans all day giving debtors a chance to sharpen their pencils.  If every one of those could be appealed, the system would certainly go tilt.  Plus, the appeals would often become moot when a new plan is confirmed assuming the bankruptcy court would not allow the case to sit during the pendency of the appeal.  If the case is ultimately dismissed during the appeal, there would be new facts to put before the court of appeals which would be in the middle of reviewing the old facts.  A conundrum for sure.”

I’ll tell you more about the 9-0 ruling this afternoon.

ABI’s Proposed Changes for Small and Mid-Size Businesses

By | January 18, 2015 | Chapter 11, Chapter 13, Chapter 7, Court Clerk Information, Courts | No comments

Below is a great article discussing the American Bankruptcy Institute’s proposal to help small business debtors.  The article first apppeared in the WSJ’s DealB%k by Prof. Michelle M. Harner.

When small and middle-market companies fail, families and founders often lose a business to which they have devoted not only most of their time but also most of their life savings, and most of the time the reason why these business fail is because they don’t know what is lead generation, which at the end is a fact that could have prevented the situation. Others lose as well: employees, suppliers, communities and lenders. Consequently, a federal bankruptcy system that effectively and efficiently rehabilitates distressed small and middle-market companies is essential.

Read more…

Follow Up: Supreme Court Weighs Power of BK Judges (Wellness International Network Ltd. v. Sharif)

By | January 15, 2015 | Appeals, Cases, Supreme Court | No comments

From Sara Randazzo of the Wall Street Journal

The Supreme Court appeared open Wednesday to clarifying the powers of nearly 1,000 judges in the federal court system, a group whose constitutional authority has come into question since a 2011 high-court decision involving the late Playboy playmate Anna Nicole Smith.

Depending on how the court rules in a case argued Wednesday, the bankruptcy-court system could remain mired in confusion over when it has the power to offer final judgments on certain issues. By extension, the ruling could also curtail the ability of the federal magistrate system to handle some of the work of district-court judges.

“This case is enormously important for the workload of the federal district courts,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional scholar and dean of the law school at the University of California, Irvine.

Read more…

Supreme Court Oral Arguments Today in Wellness International Ltd. v. Sharif

By | January 14, 2015 | Appeals, Cases, Chapter 11, Chapter 13, Chapter 7, Courts, Supreme Court | No comments

Today, January 14, 2015, the Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the latest case before the Court regarding the bankruptcy court’s jurisdictional powers — Wellness International Network, Limited v. Sharif.  The Court was not too interested in delving into this issue since the case was on the list of cases to be considered by the Justices at five separate conferences.  Regardless, the Court finally granted certiorari to the Seventh Circuit’s decision on July 1, 2014.

The Court will address the following two issues:

(1) Whether the presence of a subsidiary state property law issue in an 11 U.S.C. § 541 action brought against a debtor to determine whether property in the debtor’s possession is property of the bankruptcy estate means that such action does not “stem[] from the bankruptcy itself” and therefore, that a bankruptcy court does not have the constitutional authority to enter a final order deciding that action; and

(2) whether Article III permits the exercise of the judicial powers of the U.S. by the bankruptcy courts on the basis of litigant consent, and if so, whether implied consent based on a litigant’s conduct is sufficient to satisfy Article III.

For more information:  www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/wellness-international-network-limited-v-sharif/

Judge Sheri Bluebond Reappointed to new 14 Year Term

By | December 22, 2014 | Courts, Judges Corner | No comments

The 9th Circuit announced that Judge Sheri Bluebond has been reappointed to a new 14 year term effective this month.  She will take over as the Chief Judge of the Central District on January 29, 2015.

The 9th Circuit announcement can be accessed here.  It says

Judge Sheir Bluebond, 53, who maintains chambers in Los Angeles, came onto the bankruptcy bench in February 2001. Her reappointment to a second 14-year term is effective February 1, 2015.

Prior to her appointment, Judge Bluebond had engaged in private practice as a partner at the Los Angeles law firm of Irell & Manella LLP, where she had specialized in bankruptcy law since 1995.  She was associated previously with the Los Angeles law firms of Murphy, Weir & Butler from 1991 to 1995 and Gendel, Raskoff, Shapiro & Quittner from 1983 to 1991.

Judge Bluebond received her B.A., summa cum laude, from the University of California, Los Angeles, in 1982 and her J.D., Order of the Coif, from the UCLA School of Law in 1985, finishing first in her class and serving on the UCLA Law Review.
Judge Bluebond is a fellow of the American Bankruptcy College and serves on the Executive and Bankruptcy committees of the Commercial Law and Bankruptcy Section of the Los Angeles County Bar Association.  She serves as a frequent lecturer and panelist on various topics of bankruptcy law.

The U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California, which is authorized 24 bankruptcy judges, reported 60,545 new filings in fiscal year 2014.  Bankruptcy judges serve a 14-year renewable term and handle all bankruptcy-related matters under the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit have statutory responsibility for selecting and appointing bankruptcy judges in the nine western states that comprise the Ninth Circuit.  The court uses a comprehensive merit selection process for the initial appointment.  For reappointments, the court conducts a performance review and considers public comment evaluations.

Passing the Gavel – Judge Sheri Bluebond to Take Over as Chief Judge on January 29, 2015

By | December 19, 2014 | Courts, Judges Corner | No comments

noname

Marty Barash appointed to be the new Bankruptcy Judge in Woodland Hills.

By | December 19, 2014 | Courts, Judges Corner | No comments

Marty Barash has been appointed by the 9th Circuit to be the new Bankruptcy Judge in Woodland Hills.  He is a great choice.  He is a partner at Klee, Tuchin, Bogdanov & Stern LLP.  He should actually take the bench in March – April 2015.

Until then, the two remaining judges, Maureen Tighe and Victoria Kaufman, will be doing double duty with the help of the retired judges there.  The problem is that the retired judges have no staff.  So the staffs of the two sitting judges must do the work that was previously done by three staffs.

Tentative Ruling Gives Nice Lesson on Annulment of the Stay

By | December 9, 2014 | Cases, Judges Corner | No comments

More excellent work from Judge Scott Clarkson:

United States Bankruptcy Court
Central District of California
Judge Scott Clarkson, Presiding

Tuesday, December 09, 2014 Hearing Room 126
10:00 AM

6:14-22665 James Joseph Panzarello and Hilyam Panzarello Chapter 7

Motion for Relief from Stay

RE ACTION IN NON-BANKRUPTCY FORUM

Tentative for 12/9/2014 is to GRANT pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §362(d)(1) with 4001(a)(3) waiver.  The request for an annulment is GRANTED.

This matter was continued from 11/25/2014 where debtor appeared, but filed no written opposition. It is the Debtor’s burden, even on annulment, to file a timely opposition.

Section 362(d) provides authorization to annul the automatic stay, which, in effect, retroactively ratifies or validates acts that otherwise violated the stay. Lone Star Sec. & Video, Inc. v. Gurrola (In re Gurrola), 328 B.R. 158, 172 (9th Cir. BAP 2005). Determining whether cause exists to annul the stay retroactively a case-by-case inquiry based on a balance of the equities. Nat’l Envtl. Waste Corp. v. City of Riverside (In re Nat’l Envtl. Waste Corp.), 129 F.3d 1052, 1055 (9th Cir. 1997). In making this determination, the bankruptcy court considers 12 factors, including:
1. Number of filings;
2. Whether, in a repeat filing case, the circumstances indicate an intention to delay and hinder creditors;
3. A weighing of the extent of prejudice to creditors or third parties if the stay relief is not made retroactive, including whether harm exists to a bona fide purchaser;
4. The Debtor’s overall good faith (totality of circumstances test):
5. Whether creditors knew of stay but nonetheless took action, thus compounding the problem;
6. Whether the debtor has complied, and is otherwise complying, with the Bankruptcy Code and Rules;
7. The relative ease of restoring parties to the status quo ante;
8. The costs of annulment to debtors and creditors;
9. How quickly creditors moved for annulment, or how quickly debtors moved to set aside the sale or violative conduct;
10.Whether, after learning of the bankruptcy, creditors proceeded to take steps in continued violation of the stay, or whether they moved expeditiously to gain relief;
11.Whether annulment of the stay will cause irreparable injury to the debtor;
12.Whether stay relief will promote judicial economy or other efficiencies. In re Fjeldsted, 293 B.R. 12, 25 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. 2003).

Read more…

Tentative Ruling on Contempt for Violation of the Discharge Injunction

By | December 8, 2014 | Cases, Chapter 7, Judges Corner | No comments

Judge Ted Albert’s usual excellent work.

United States Bankruptcy Court
Central District of California
Judge Theodor Albert, Presiding
Courtroom 5B Calendar
Santa Ana
Tuesday, December 09, 2014 Hearing Room 5B
11:00 AM

8:10-23458 Carlos Antonio Bernal Chapter 7
#14.00 Order To Show Cause RE: Contempt Against *************

This is a hearing on the OSC re contempt issued by the court 10/29/14 at the request of the debtor.  There is proof of service upon attorney Silverstein but not as to the other alleged contemnor, Grand Commerce Center, LLC.  Only attorney Silverstein has responded.  First, the discharge injunction is effective as to all discharged debts.  While Attorney Silverstein alleges that he was not listed in the petition and schedules, the certificate of notice dated 9/26/10 suggests that his client was.  Moreover, in no-asset cases all debts are discharged whether listed or not.  In re Heilman, 430 B.R. 213, 218 (9th Cir. BAP 2010).  Therefore, every aspect of the garnishment obtained on a judgment issued after the 1/13/2011 is potentially a contempt.  But unlike stay violations which make all violations automatically void, violation of the discharge injunction is treated as contempt, so damages and penalties resulting must be considered in terms of the willfulness of the violation.  Attorney Silverstein tries to make an issue of the corporate vs individual status under §362(k), but this is misplaced since clearly the debtor (which is the only status that matters) is an individual, and discharge injunction violations are judged on a different standard anyway.  Attorney Silverstein submits a declaration indicating he knew nothing about the bankruptcy and stopped immediately the garnishment once he learned of it. He also mentions the monies garnished were refunded or never obtained (it is unclear which).  But the exact timing of all of this is left vague.  The court notes that several wage statements are attached as exhibits showing that garnishments continued for several pay periods including as late as 9/26, although Mr. Spector’s letter to attorney Silverstein is dated August 8, 2014.  So, absent another explanation, it would seem at the very least that Attorney Silverstein was slow in responding. Also conspicuously absent in Attorney Silverstein’s papers is any recognition that ongoing garnishment imposes a real hardship on a debtor struggling to obtain his fresh start. Lastly, the court expects attorneys, particularly ones involved in debt collection practice who must know of these principles, will adhere to higher standards. Different considerations (and potentially higher consequences) may apply as to Grand Commerce, if service can be effected.

Damages equal to attorney’s fees and reopening fee incurred post discharge.

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →