All posts in Courts

Word Version of LBR Order Forms Revised

By | June 13, 2012 | Court Clerk Information | No comments

ATTENTION RE: Word Version of LBR Order Forms Revised

The Court has updated all of the Word versions of its LBR (Local Bankruptcy Rule) order forms so that the forms are compatible with LOU and streamline processing for the Court. The forms have been posted on the Court’s website. Please begin using these modified LBR order forms immediately when lodging an order through LOU.

These order forms include the Proofs of Service of Document and Notice of Entered Order that became effective June 1, 2012. No other text on these order forms has been changed, nor have the form revision dates. The Court is currently updating its other LBR forms to be more compatible with CM/ECF and to include the new Proof of Service of Document and Notice of Entered Order. A notice will be sent when this project has been completed.

Any questions may be directed to the ECF Help Desk at: ECF_support@cacb.uscourts.gov.

Best regards,

ECF Help Desk
(213) 894-2365

CM/ECF Dictionary Updates Effective 6/4/12

By | May 31, 2012 | Court Clerk Information | No comments

ATTENTION ECF USERS

Attached please the most current CM/ECF Dictionary updates listing specific docket event codes to be used with the new LBR forms that become effective 6/1/2012, as well some docket event codes that have been retired.

These event code changes will become effective as of Monday, June 4, 2012.

Any questions may be directed to the ECF Help Desk at:  ECF_support@cacb.uscourts.gov.

Best regards,

ECF Help Desk
(213) 894-2365

Judge Robert Kwan Rules that the Absolute Priority Rule Still Applies in Individual Chapter 11 Cases

By | May 26, 2012 | Absolute Priority Rule, Case Briefs, Chapter 11, Judges Corner | 1 Comment

In re Arnold,  — B.R. — , 2:12-bk-15623 (Bkrtcy, C.D. Ca. May, 2012  Kwan.J.)

Issue:   Does the absolute priority rule still apply in individual chapter 11 cases?

Holding:   Yes.

Judge Robert Kwan

The debtors here filed a individual chapter 11.  They own a number of pieces of real property.  They filed a chapter 11 disclosure statement and plan and US Bank objected on the basis that the disclosure statement did not contain adequate information and that the plan was patently unconfirmable because it violates the absolute priority rule.  The US Bank unsecured claim was based on a deficiency on property which the debtors had guaranteed.

Judge Kwan agreed with US Bank and refused to approve the disclosure statement.  As to whether the disclosure statement contained adequate information, the court found that the options given to unsecured creditors were confusing, did not advise creditors which option would apply, and did not advise creditors of the significance of various court rulings on the various options.  The disclosure statement also advised creditors that the debtors would make a new value contribution of $250,000 “at their election” but did not say where that money was going to come from and therefore the feasibility of making the contribution.

Read more…

Ask the Judges Program – June 4, 2012

By | May 22, 2012 | Judges Corner, Programs | 1 Comment

LOS ANGELES BANKRUPTCY FORUM IN CONJUNCTION WITH PUBLIC COUNSEL ANNOUNCES ITS JUNE 4, 2012 PROGRAM

“ASK THE JUDGES ”

COME AND FIND OUT EVERYTHING YOU EVER WANTED TO LEARN ABOUT BANKRUPTCY BUT WERE AFRAID TO ASK

PANELISTS:     UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGES

The Honorable Peter Carroll – Chief Judge

The Honorable Vincent P. Zurzolo

The Honorable Sheri Bluebond – Moderator

The Honorable Richard M. Neiter

The Honorable Robert N. Kwan

The Honorable Catherine E. Bauer

The Honorable Deborah J. Saltzman

The Honorable Mark S. Wallace

The Honorable Sandra R. Klein

The Honorable Julie Brand

The Honorable Neil Bason

Read more…

Supreme Court Quote

By | May 22, 2012 | Supreme Court | 1 Comment

“[The requirement of a speedy bankruptcy case] is a wise policy, and if those who administer the law could be induced to act upon its spirit, would do much to make the statute more acceptable than it is.  But instead of this the inferior courts are filled with suits by or against [trustees], each of whom as soon as appointed retains an attorney, if property enough comes to his hands to pay one, and then instead of speedy sales, reasonable compromises, and efforts to adjust differences, the estate is wasted in profitless litigation, and the fees of the officers who execute the law.”

Bailey v. Glover, 88 U.S. 342 (1874)

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel — Staff Attorney Vacancy Announcement

By | May 18, 2012 | Courts | No comments

The Bankruptcy Appellate Panel for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals is seeking a temporary staff attorney to work in its Pasadena, CA office.

Information attached.

Judge Albert Tentative Ruling re Addendum to Chapter 13 Plan

By | May 18, 2012 | Chapter 13, Judges Corner | 11 Comments

May 16, 2012

Tentative Ruling:

This is the confirmation of the debtors’ Chapter 13 plan. The Bank of New York Mellon (“bank”) has filed an objection, primarily concerning the attachment of the optional Addendum promulgated by the Central District. The bank argues that the Addendum is superseded as inconsistent with revised FRBP 3002.1 which was adopted by the Supreme Court December 2011.

The bank’s argument is not persuasive on any of its points.

First, the bank argues that FRBP 3002.1(b) and (c) as amended is an Act of Congress. It is not, except insofar as it could be argued that 28 U.S.C. §2075, which requires that changed rules be submitted by the Supreme Court for Congressional review by May 1, becomes an “act of Congress” each year when Congress fails to respond (as here).

Second, it is equally true that no Local Rule can be enacted if it inconsistent with, or duplicative of, either an act of Congress or the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure. See FRBP 9029. But the court is not persuaded that the Addendum is inconsistent or duplicative of the Rules or any of them. Rule 3002.1 (b) and (c) governs proofs of claim, and the notices required there under are to be given as supplements to the proof of claim. The court is not sure this is quite the same thing as monthly mortgage statements particularly when the plan calls for monthly statements.

Read more…

“Tips” to Keep Your Judges in Santa Ana Happy

By | May 18, 2012 | Judges Corner | 1 Comment

Here is a nice list of “tips” from the judges and their clerks in Santa Ana.  You can access it here from the Orange County Bankruptcy Forum website.

Public Notice PN 12-009 Re: New & Revised LBR Forms Effective June 1, 2012

By | May 16, 2012 | Court Clerk Information | No comments

Attached please find the new Public Notice PN 12-009 Re: New & Revised LBR Forms that will become Effective June 1, 2012. Any questions may be directed to the ECF Help Desk at: ECF_support@cacb.uscourts.gov.

Best regards, ECF Help Desk (213) 894-2365

 LBR Form Number LBR Form Title
F 2081-1.5.MOTION.

EMPLOYMENT (New)

Notice of Motion and Motion In Individual Chapter 11 Case For Order Employing Professional [LBR 2014-1]
F 2081-1.5.ORDER.

EMPLOYMENT (New)

Order RE Motion In Individual Chapter 11 Case For Order Employing Professional [LBR 2014-1]
F 2081-1.6.MOTION.

BARDATE (New)

Notice of Motion and Motion In Individual Chapter 11 Case For Order Setting Bar Date For Filing Proofs of Claim
F 2081-1.6.ORDER.

BARDATE (New)

Order Setting Bar Date for Filing Proofs of Claim In An Individual Chapter 11 Case
F 2081-1.6.NOTICE.

BARDATE (New)

Notice of Bar Date for Filing Proof of Claim In An Individual Chapter 11 Case [LBR 3001-1]
F 3015-1.4.DEC.

PRECONF.PAYMTS

(Replaces F 3015-1.4 and F 3015-1.10)

Declaration Setting Forth Postpetition, Preconfirmation Payments on: 1) Deeds of Trust [or Mortgages]; 2) Leases on Personal Property; 3) Purchase Money Security Liens on Personal Property [LBR 3015-1(e) and LBR 3015-1(m)]
F 7004-1.SUMMONS.

ADV.PROC

 Summons and Notice of Status Conference in Adversary Proceeding [LBR 7004-1]
F 9013-3.1.PROOF.

SERVICE

 Proof of Service of Document
F 9021-1.1.NOTICE.

ENTERED.ORDER

 Notice of Entered Order and Service List

District Court, Central District Launches New Website

By | May 3, 2012 | Court Clerk Information | No comments

Notice from the Clerk:

The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California has a new public (Internet) website.  Official launch date is scheduled for Monday,  May 7, 2012; however, users may experience interruptions beginning 5:00  p.m. Friday, May 4th.

We are confident that you will be pleased with the improvements made to the  site.  We have provided special sections for frequent visitors, such as jurors, lawyers, members of the media, and litigants without lawyers .  We  have also reorganized the content with user-friendly navigation menus.

The full website will be under construction for the remainder of the  calendar year. During this time, it will be important to note the following:

Read more…

← Older Entries
Newer Entries →