Is It Too Early to File for Bankruptcy Outstanding Checks Written Pre-Petition Are Property of the Estate

By: Elisa M. Pickel
St. John's Law Student
American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review Staff

Recently, in In re Brubaker[1] a Florida bankruptcy court held that funds related to checks that had not cleared were property of the estate under section 541(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.[2] In Brubaker, the debtors wrote several checks before filing for chapter 7 relief.[3] As of the filing date, these checks had not cleared, and therefore the funds remained in the debtors’ bank account.[4] The bankruptcy court rejected the debtors’ argument that these funds transferred on the dates that the checks were presented to the recipient, and thus were not property of the estate. Instead, the court noted that funds do not transfer until the checks are honored. Thus, the court held that funds remaining in the account were property of the estate since the debtors’ bank had not honored the checks.

Under section 542(a) all property in “possession, custody, or control” of the debtor at the start of the case must be delivered to the trustee.[5] The court looked at the UCC for guidance in determining “control” under section 542(a).[6] Under the UCC, a check is simply an order for the bank to pay the recipient a stated sum of money on demand.[7] Until the bank issues payment, the debtor has the ability to close the account or stop payment of the check.[8] Since the checks in Brubaker had not been cashed at the time of filing, the funds were in debtors’ control and remained part of the estate.[9] In Barnhill v. Johnson (In re Barnhill)[10] the Supreme Court held that transfer of funds occurred when the drawee bank honored the check.[11] The court followed this decision and also considered the bankruptcy policy that the trustee must distribute funds among creditors fairly and equitably.[12] The court decided that the best way to accomplish this goal was to determine that the transfer of funds did not occur until the bank honored the check.[13] Holding otherwise would make it too easy for debtors and aggressive creditors to outsmart the system by selecting to pay certain creditors instead of others, knowing that those payments would be honored, thus defeating the goal of equitable distribution.[14] As a result, courts have consistently held that outstanding funds remain property of the estate.[15] 

How should a debtor deal with these checks becoming property of the estate? Some options exist for the debtor. First, the debtor could notify his bank that he has filed for bankruptcy protection, his account is part of the estate, and any checks presented for payment should no longer be honored.[16] Although, the debtor should be careful writing checks on the eve of filing. It may be fraudulent if the debtor knows he intends to file for bankruptcy at the time the checks are written and therefore payment will be stopped.[17] Second, the debtor can wait until all drawn checks have cleared from the account before filing a petition of relief.[18]  It should be noted that this option only relates to “when” a debtor should file bankruptcy. Although a debtor may want his checks to clear, there may be more imminent concerns. For example, the value of outstanding checks is probably not the biggest concern if a debtor’s home is being foreclosed. 


[1] 426 B.R. 902 (2010).

[2] In re Brubaker, 426 B.R. 902, 903 (2010).

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] See 11 U.S.C. § 542(a) (2006).

[6] Id.

[7] U.C.C. § 3-104(a)(2); Fla. Stat. § 673.1041(1)(b) (2009).

[8] See In re Brubaker, 426 B.R. at 907.

[9] See id.

[10] 503 U.S. 393 (1992).

[11] Barnhill, 503 U.S. 393, 401 (1992) (“[B]ecause the debtor in this case retained the ability to stop payment on the check until the very last, we do not think that the transfer of funds in this case can be said to have ‘taken effect between the debtor and petitioner’ until the moment of honor.”).

[12] See Mauer v. Hedback (In re Mauer), 140 B.R. 744, 746 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1992).

[13] See id.

[14] In re Spencer, 362 B.R. 489, 493 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2006).

[15] In re Brubaker, 426 B.R. at 905. There is a split among courts as to who has the burden to recover the funds. IdCompare In re Minter-Higgins, 366 B.R. 880 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2007), discussed in Consumer Debtor Not Responsible For Items Clearing Bank Account Post-Petition, http://stjohns.abiworld.org/node/39 (Apr. 13, 2009) (placing burden of recovering funds on trustee) with In re Sawyer, 324 B.R. 114 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 2005) (placing burden of recovering funds on debtor).

[16] In re Parker, No. 05-17912, 2008 WL 906570, at *2 (Bankr. N.D.N.Y. April 3, 2008).

[17] See Shake v. County of Buffalo, Neb., 154 B.R. 270, 276 (Bankr. D. Neb. 1993) (allowing criminal complaint against drawer of bad check to proceed as exception to automatic stay of section 362); Johnson v. Lindsey, 16 B.R. 211, 213 (Bankr. D. Fla. 1981) (permitting criminal prosecution for issuing worthless check, but not permitting repayment if found guilty).

[18] In re Parker, 2008 WL 906570 at *5.