Max Out Your Credit Score!
December 16, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
Recently in Individual Category
Bankruptcy filings down
July 28, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
According to a NY Times article, bankruptcy filings are down. There are projected to be between 5 and 10% few filings this year. There are a number of factors cited: access to credit, amount of consumer debt, and economic factors (unemployment and foreclosures).
Stern v. Marshall (US S.Ct.)
June 30, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
Stern, Executor for Est. of Marshall v. Marshall, Executrix for Est. of Marshall, Supreme Court of United States Decided June 23
Click here to view and download the opinion in .pdf format.
The Question: Whether a bankruptcy court judge hadauthority under 28 U. S. C. §157 and Article III of the US Constitution to enter final judgment on a counterclaim filed by Vickie Lynn Marshall a/k/a Anna Nicole Smith (whose Estate is Petitioner) against Pierce Marshall (whose Estate is Respondent) in her bankruptcy proceedings.
The Upshot: As set forth in §157(a) Congress divided bankruptcy proceedings into 3 categories:
- Cases under Title 11;
- Cases arising in a Title 11 case; and
- Cases related to a case under Title 11.
With respect to the first 2 categories, "core proceedings arising under title 11, or arising in a case under title 11," District courts refer proceedings to bankruptcy judges, who intern are empowered to enter a final judgment. §§157(a), (b). Pierce argued that the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction to resolve Vickie's counterclaim because his own initial defamation claim against her was a "personal injury tort" - that is, the kind of thing that the bankruptcy court lacked jurisdiction to hear under §157(b) because it did not arise under title 11 or arise in a title 11 case.
The Decision: A majority of the Supreme Court agreed with Pierce and rejected the claim made by the estate of Anna Nicole that the bankruptcy court legitimately exercised jurisdiction over the counterclaim as an adjunct of the District Court or Court of Appeals. Instead the Court held that the 1984 Bankruptcy Act and §§157(c) and 1334(c) required that some matters be sent to the State or District courts for resolution, and nothing about this situation changed that basic division of labor.
In re Highlands of Montour, 10-21678 (ND IL ED) (J. Hollis)
June 9, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
In re: Highlands of Montour Run, LLC 10-21678
Opinion Issued June 08 '11 By Judge Pamela S. Hollis
Summary: Creditor objected to approval of disclosure statement where plan contemplated using rents from apartment complex after the automatic stay had been lifted with respect to the apartment complex and creditor had asserted its right to take possession of the apartment complex and the rents. Creditor"s objection was sustained on the basis that the rents were no longer property of the estate.
Click here to view and download the Opinion in .pdf format.
College Illinois goes Bust
June 9, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
College Illinois lets parents invest today and lock in tuition for their kids down the line. Now Attorney General Lisa Madigan has opened a review of the program. The commission has run a deficit of over $300 million for 2 years due to lax investment practices like its $12.8 million in Shorebank Corp., which collapsed last year. Spokespeople for the commission say they were attempting to keep pace with the cost of higher-education ... but lost everything instead. Oops! Now it looks like the system is out of money; and since investments are not guaranteed, the investors (parents) appear to be out of luck.
Are Your Student Loans Current?
June 8, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8T9KgsmJTI]
Over 50, Out of Work, Family Stopped Loving Him
May 25, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
There, but for the grace of God, go I.
[vimeo http://www.vimeo.com/23376949 w=400&h=225]
Illinois foreclosures down ...
March 10, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
via realtytrac.com
... but still in the national top 10, meaning that 1 in 550 housing units in Illinois is now in foreclosure. That in turn translates to roughly 1 out of every 10 residential homes.
But the real scourge of the real estate market is that is has hollowed out entire blocks and permanently affected the ability of homeowners to move, sell, divorce, or refinance. Most are stuck, and many are stuck paying for more house than they actually have.
Satan's Credit Cards
February 28, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
This article in CNNMoney identifies 9 credit cards industry experts told CNNMoney were among the worst in America for nose-bleed interest rates and ridiculous fees. Here's the list:
- Applied Bank Unsecured Visa Gold Card
- First Premier Bank MasterCard
- Baby Phat Prepaid Visa RushCard
- Hooters MasterCard
- The Shack Credit Card
- Shell Select Member Card
- Visa Black Card
- JCPenney Rewards Credit Card
- Household Bank Premium Platinum MasterCard
The Real Reason Chicago Population Went South
February 25, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
quoted from RealEstateUS
Foreclosed and Bankruptcy Homes Led to Population Decline in Chicago -> http://goo.gl/epKjA #foreclosure
In re Shields/Springer v. Shields (ND IL ED)(J. Squires)
February 23, 2011, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
In re Earl W. Shields, 10-000943
800 Springer v. Shields, 10-00693
Issued: February 8, 2011
By Judge: John H. Squires
Click here to download and view the Opinion in .pdf format.
Westlaw Case Updates
November 4, 2010, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
In re: Kleibrink (Cir. 5, Sep. 28)
In a debtor's appeal from a district court's affirmance of a bankruptcy court's ruling that a creditor held an enforceable security interest in a property of his, despite his having received a discharge in an earlier bankruptcy proceeding, the order is affirmed where the notice given to the creditor did not satisfy the due process standard for notice set forth in Mullane.
In re: NM Holdings Co., LLC (Cir. 6, Sep. 30)
In a bankruptcy trustee's suit against debtor-company's former auditor, claiming that the auditor negligently performed its audits by failing to uncover and report unsound related-party transactions entered into by the company's sole shareholder and CEO, as well as aided and abetted the CEO's breach of his fiduciary duty to the company, district court's grant of the auditor's motion for summary judgment is affirmed where: 1) the trustee's amended complaint does not allege reliance by the company or by the company's fairness committee, and the alleged reliance by the company's creditors cannot support a claim brought by the trustee on behalf of the company; and 2) district court did not err in holding that the residual statute of limitations applied to the trustee's aiding-and-abetting claim.
In Re: Res. Tech. Corp. (Cir. 7, Oct. 1)
District Court affirmed Bankruptcy Court's rejection of Trustee's proposed assignment of Debtor's contracts to a company managed by its former officers in exchange for that company paying debtor's operating expenses because
1) Bankruptcy court carefully evaluated the assumption-and-assignment proposal under section 365(f)(2)(B), and its decision to deny the trustee's motion was sound;
2) There was no reason to disturb Bankruptcy judge's determination that the company failed to comply with its order requiring an escrow deposit; and
3) District Court's contempt finding was fully supported by the record, and the court thoroughly considered and properly rejected the company's defense to contempt.
In re Vito O. Roppo, 09 B 37273
September 22, 2010, by M. Hedayat & Associates, P.C.
In re Vito O. Roppo, 09 B 37273
Opinion Sept. 16, 2010
Judge: John H. Squires
Debtor's lavish living warranted dismissal of Chapter 7 case as abusive.
A Chapter 7 case that was not filed in response to any sudden illness, calamity, disability or unemployment by a debtor who budgeted expenses consistently exceeded those permitted under Internal Revenue Service (IRS) standards, including the $2,250 per month that the debtor budgeted as a rental expense for a four-bedroom, 3,750-square-foot home for himself, his wife and their one child, had to be dismissed based on the totality of circumstances of the debtor's financial situation as an abuse of the provisions of Chapter 7. Inexplicably, despite the fact that his wife had recently emerged from her own Chapter 7 case and did not work outside the home, the debtor had purchased a luxury automobile on her behalf, on which the payments were $520 per month. The debtor had the ability to fund a Chapter 13 plan to make a distribution on unsecured claims.
To view the opinion in PDF format click here.
