11 U.S.C. § 521(a)(3), (4); Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4002. Trustee filed motion to hold Debtors in contempt for failure to fully comply with specific discovery provisions in Court’s August 17, 2006 Order and, if Debtors could not locate required documents or information both Debtors were to execute and file affidavit with explanation. Upon Trustee’s evidentiary showing of Debtors’ failure to comply by clear and convincing evidence, Debtors should be prepared to show cause why they should not be held in civil contempt. Court has power to find Debtors in civil contempt and order sanctions, including incarceration and payment of fines and fees.
You are here
Opinions
Effective January 1, 2017, Orders in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia designated by the Court as "opinions" will be transmitted to the Government Publishing Office (GPO) and made available to the public at no cost. To view these opinions, click HERE to be transferred to GPO site.
Orders designated as Opinions and issued between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2016 are maintained on this website. Many of these Opinions are not intended for publication and are so designated. Each entry includes the style of the matter, the case number, the date entered on the docket, and a short parenthetical expression of the issue(s) raised. The most recent opinions appear first.
You can narrow your search by judge and/or year below. You can also use the search feature above to search by name, word, or phrase. The single opinions are in PDF text format and may be searched for word, phrase, or date by using “Control F,” the Windows search function available in any Windows application.
Judge Joyce Bihary (Retired)
Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4002(5). Debtors are ordered to comply with bankruptcy law and this Order to provide a new address to Trustee and to file same with Clerk’s office.
11 U.S.C. §§ 522(d); 541(c)(2); O.C.G.A.
§ 44-13-100. Chapter 7 Trustee filed objection to Debtors’ claims of exemptions and motion to surcharge the exemptions. Surcharge against a debtor’s exemption appropriate where debtor has underreported assets or has engaged in exceptional misconduct in order to protect integrity of bankruptcy process and creditors of the estate. Debtors’ motion to surcharge homestead and vehicle exemption granted. Debtors allowed their exemptions in household goods, furnishings and jewelry, but personal property valued in excess of those amounts must be turned over to the Trustee. Trustee’s surcharge request with regard to the IRA accounts is denied unless the Trustee demonstrates such accounts are not excluded from property of the estate.
Chapter 7 Trustee’s motion to compel Debtors to deliver property and cooperate with the Trustee and to vacate their residence granted with specific instructions
(11 U.S.C. §§ 1325(a), (a)(5)(B)(ii),(a)(9); 1326(a)(1)(A), (a)(1)(C), (a)(2), (a)(3); 361). Under BAPCPA, secured car creditor objected to confirmation of Debtor’s Chapter 13 plan because Debtor’s adequate protection payments were not being paid directly to creditor but were paid to Chapter 13 Trustee and because they were not being applied to both principal and interest, but were being applied to reduce principal only. Objections overruled. With regard to the adequate protection payments made to the Chapter 13 Trustee, the statutory scheme allows Chapter 13 Trustee to administer such adequate protection payments; the administrative lien on the adequate protection payments protects the creditor if the case is dismissed prior to confirmation; and practical considerations, including accounting difficulties and record keeping, favor administration by the Chapter 13 Trustee. With regard to adequate protection payments being applied to principal and interest, creditor’s analysis is unconvincing. Application of the payment to an interest component would effect a significant change in bankruptcy law unsupported by legislative history and contradicts fundamental bankruptcy principles.
Court denied Debtor’s motion to reopen her Chapter 7 case to add a previously unlisted claim against a former husband. Chapter 7 Trustee opposed reopening the case as administration of the claim would be unduly burdensome and of no benefit to the estate
11 U.S.C. §§ 1325(a)(4); 1326(a), (a)(2); Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3015(b)). Chapter 13 Trustee’s objection to confirmation sustained and his motion to reconvert case to Chapter 7 case granted. Debtor’s case been pending over one year without any payment to unsecured creditors; Debtor has failed to propose a confirmable Chapter 13 plan; he has failed to keep payments to the Chapter 13 Trustee current and failed to keep his mortgage payments current. Creditors will receive more value through a Chapter 7 Trustee’s liquidation of assets than under a Chapter 13 plan. Debtor’s counsel’s argument that Chapter 13 plan should not have to be proposed or funded until after claims bar date is without merit
Debtor filed pro se motion to reimpose stay after foreclosure sale of her residence. Her former counsel and creditor’s counsel, after two different hearings, were directed but failed to prepare an Order granting relief to Debtor by keeping the stay in effect. After mortgage loan was transferred, second creditor foreclosed on property and evicted Debtor. Debtor had made mortgage payments to former counsel, but he had not sent the funds to the mortgage company. Counsel must promptly return to Debtor the $2,200 in funds and file a report evidencing the return
(Debtor’s failure to file schedules, statement of financial affairs, copies of payment advices, and statement of monthly net income pursuant to § 521(i)(1) results in automatic dismissal of his Chapter 7 case, effective on the 46th day after filing petition.)
(United States Trustee’s motion to dismiss with prejudice Debtor’s pro se Chapter 11 case pursuant to § 1112(b), (b)(4)(F), and (b)(4)(H), granted on the grounds that Debtor failed to satisfy timely filing requirement; failed to provide certain information and attend meeting with United States Trustee; and for filing case not in good faith. Debtor’s request for recusal is denied)