In re LTL fee application summary By: Donald L Swanson Here is a hard-knocks rule (i.e., a rule learned the hard way) on fees for a court-approved professional in bankruptcy: representing a debtor, committee or trustee in bankruptcy has all the downside of a contingent fee case—but none of the upside. Here is what that means:... Continue Reading →
Winding Down A 97 Year Old Bankruptcy Case (In re Yellow Poplar Lumber)
Art deco, circa 1920s (photo by Marilyn Swanson) By: Donald L. Swanson This has got to be one of the longest-running bankruptcy cases . . . ever. It was filed on July 17, 1928, and it is being wound-down now. A recent Bankruptcy Court Order in that case (entered January 22, 2025) addresses the question of... Continue Reading →
§ 523(a) Discharge Exceptions & The Corporate Subchapter V Debtor (In re Blok Industries)
Corporations doing business here (photo by Marilyn Swanson) By: Donald L Swanson “[T]his Court finds that the exceptions to discharge under §523(a) only apply to individuals in Subchapter V.” Spring, et al. v. Davidson and Blok Industries, Inc. (In re Davidson; In re Blok Industries, Inc.; Jointly Administered), Adv. No. 23-3005, Doc. 87, at 15 (Bankr.,... Continue Reading →
Is An Automatic Stay Waiver, In A Pre-Petition Forbearance Agreement, Enforceable? (In re DJK Enterprises)
Enforceable? (Photo by Marilyn Swanson) By: Donald L Swanson “While the pre-petition Debtor may have consented to waiver of the automatic stay in favor of [secured creditor], . . . other creditors did not”; and “The automatic stay is designed to protect both debtors and creditors alike.” In re DJK Enterprises, LLC, Case No. 24-60126, Doc.... Continue Reading →
Conversion Of Involuntary Chapter 7 Business Case To Subchapter V: Legal Standards Identified & Applied (In re Zarifian)
A path (photo by Marilyn Swanson) By: Donald L Swanson A recent Bankruptcy Court opinion grants an involuntary Debtor’s motion to convert its Chapter 7 case to Subchapter V—relying on a U.S. Supreme Court opinion. This Bankruptcy Court opinion provides a path for others to follow. The opinion is In re Zarifian Enterprises LLC, Case No.... Continue Reading →
Purdue Pharma Delays—A Bad Deal For Some Claimants, But A Good Deal For Others . . . So Far!
A bad deal for some (photo by Marilyn Swanson) By: Donald L Swanson Back in September of 2021, a super-majority of voting plaintiffs (95%) supported confirmation of the Purdue Pharma bankruptcy plan. Under the plan, the Sackler family would contribute $6.0 billion to pay plaintiffs. The plan was confirmed by the Bankruptcy Court, and the super-majority... Continue Reading →
BAPCPA: Overruling Eighth Circuit’s “Absurdity” Opinions On “Projected Disposable Income”
BAPCPA By: Donald L Swanson Back in the mid-1990s, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals issued two opinions declaring the plain meaning of “projected disposable income” in § 1225(b)(1) to be “absurd” and that the true meaning thereof is, instead, “actual disposable income” determined at the end of the debtor’s confirmed Chapter 12 plan. Such two... Continue Reading →
Business Risks Are Real And Ever-Expanding (TikTok v. Garland): That’s Why We Need Effective Bankruptcy Laws
Tick tock (photo by Marilyn Swanson) By: Donald L Swanson Being in business is risky. And the risks are ever-expanding. The latest illustration of a new risk is the case of TikTok, Inc. v. Garland. The new risk is for businesses using the TikTok social media platform: i.e., the U.S. Government can shut that social media... Continue Reading →
BAPCPA: Bankruptcy Filing Is Morally Equivalent To Shoplifting (So Says A Congressional Report)
BAPCPA By: Donald L Swanson Here are five points explaining why the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005 (“BAPCPA”) should be enacted . . . appearing on the opening page of this “Report of the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives” (at fn. 1, emphasis added): “Shoplifting is wrong; bankruptcy is also... Continue Reading →
ABCs & Bankruptcy, Part 5: Effect Of An ABC On A Pending Lawsuit–“The Most Honest Act” (Reed v. McIntyre)
By Donald L. Swanson “[T]he appellant would not have acquired priority over other creditors by the sheriff's levy, for the obvious reason that the right of property in the goods seized under the execution had previously passed” to the assignee under Debtor’s ABC. Reed v McIntyre, 98 U.S. 507, 512 (1878). Facts The Debtor, in the... Continue Reading →