Rochelle's Daily Wire

The Fourth Circuit wrote a scholarly (and dense) opinion differentiating among bankruptcy standing, bankruptcy appellate standing and constitutional standing.

A district judge in Florida upheld a Subchapter V plan that required automatic increases in payments to unsecured creditors based on actual disposable income.

When it comes to overbroad exculpations and nondebtor releases, a nonseverability clause in a chapter 11 plan won’t invoke equitable mootness to dismiss an appeal from confirmation.

The Code and the Rules are unclear about a chapter 13 debtor’s obligation to disclose assets acquired post-petition that were not derived from income.

Courts are deeply split on a chapter 13 debtor’s ability to keep the appreciation in an exempt home, whether or not the case converts to chapter 7.

Although the chapter 13 confirmation order was concededly final and enforceable, the appeals court set aside a plan provision modifying a residential mortgage.

The Eleventh Circuit stated the obvious: A class that gets something under a chapter 11 plan is entitled to a disclosure statement and to vote again if an amendment takes it away, even if the class was entitled to nothing in the first place.

All three courts to confront the question have now ordered the government to refund overpayments of U.S. Trustee fees.

Although deposed as debtor in possession, the Subchapter V debtor retains the sole power to file a chapter 11 plan.

Bankruptcy Judge Robert Mark used common sense and logic to answer a question where the statute has no ready answer.