July 7 - Members and Subscribers - Welcome to the new and improved abi.org! - If you have not already done so, please reset your ABI password to access the site. Click "Login" and then "Forgot Password"
This panel discusses the role of the subchapter V trustee, the parallels with mediation, and the meaning of "facilitating the development of a consensual plan."
Hannah Hutman and Jeff Fraser, co-chairs of the ABI Consumer Bankruptcy Committee, thank all committee members for their participation this year.
The committee once again played a vital role in ABI’s Consumer Practice Extravaganza (CPEX), which held a successful Part 1 in November 2024 and is gearing up for a robust Part 2 in January 2025. They partnered with ABI’s professional staff, Advisory Board Co-Chairs Jeff Fraser (also co-chair of the Consumer Committee) and Summer Shaw, and the CPEX judicial board.
With the climate of COVID-19 in the rearview mirror, the consumer bankruptcy process now largely resembles the normalcy that had been elusive during the pandemic. However, remnants of COVID legislation have influenced escrow accounts of consumer debtors and consequently impacted mortgage creditor proofs of claim.
This panel will discuss the ins and outs of mediating consumer bankruptcy issues, including the types of issues typically mediated, selecting a mediator, and special considerations involved.
The primary purposes of the bankruptcy process are to maximize the payments to a debtor’s creditors and provide debtors with a fresh start.[1] At first glance, the importance of firearm ownership appears unrelated to satisfy the purposes of the bankruptcy process. However, without the ability to exempt essential property from creditors, debtors would be left without the ability to achieve success with a renewed start. The next question then becomes, are firearms essential personal property?
In In re Smith, [1] the Third Circuit reminded consumer bankruptcy practitioners of the wrath of res judicata. The debtor owned an encumbered rental property with an assignment of rents to her mortgage lender. The debtor’s proposed chapter 13 plan included a cramdown of the mortgage lender’s claim that reduced the secured portion of the claim from $150,000 to $95,000 — the value of the collateral. The plan further provided that the payment of rents would pay down the secured portion of the lender’s claim.
