Rochelle's Daily Wire

Despite Fulton, a Chicago bankruptcy judge rules that the City of Chicago might have violated Section 362(a)(4), (a)(6) or (a)(7) by refusing to release impounded cars immediately after a debtor files a chapter 13 petition.

The suggestion that the debtor never won undercut the poker player’s testimony about uncorroborated gambling losses.

Confirming a chapter 13 plan on the assumption that a claim was entitled to priority didn’t bar the debtors from later objecting to the priority of the claim.

The ‘conduct’ test in the Seventh Circuit, not the ‘accrual test,’ determines when a claim arose and whether it was discharged.

The opinion tells plaintiffs what actions to take before filing suit to ensure constitutional standing to pursue a claim under the FDCPA.

The Seventh Circuit provided a useful guide for how much supervision a lawyer must provide when a nonlawyer is doing most of the work.

The $13,650 cap on priority claims for each employee under an ‘employee benefit plan’ applies to each benefit plan, not to all of an employer’s benefit plans added together, the Seventh Circuit says.

Seventh Circuit says that Fulton left open the question of whether holding an impounded car violates Sections 362(a)(4) or (a)(6).

Another court strains to explain why costs incurred by disciplinary authorities were not in compensation for “actual pecuniary loss.”

The statutory basis for permanent relief under today’s chapter 15 was found in former Section 304, which chapter 15 superseded.