Consumer

This single plenary session will feature a policy-oriented panel discussing the reasons for municipal insolvency nationally, with a particular focus on the New England Region. The panel of highly-experienced government officials, municipal receivers and thought leaders will review and debate the challenges faced by state and local leaders in their efforts to address the financial stress facing many of our cities and towns. Among the issues to be addressed are: the pressures of labor contracts, legacy benefits, and pension and retirement plans on municipal budgets; creditor and bondholder relations; sections of the code that impact these issues; and trends arising from the most recent cases. The panel may also touch on needed Chapter 9 reform. Lawyers, lenders, insolvency specialists, as well as those interested in the future of our cities and towns, will be interested in this program.

The information you glean from Part I needs to be viewed with the practical approach found in Part II. If you are challenging dischargeability, how do you prove it? All debtors are in a hardship, but what is an undue hardship, and again, what evidence should you have at the ready to prove the debtor’s case. Using a short vignette, this panel will address the evidentiary and practical quandaries that must be overcome in order to plead and prove a case for dischargeability of loans under Section 523(a)(8).

Debtors frequently emerge from bankruptcy still burdened by a burgeoning student loan debt. A private “loan for an educational benefit” can limit the fresh start many debtors need is increasingly being used to test the nondischargeability of might have once been general unsecured claims. This panel will discuss the emerging issues and case law surrounding nondischargeability, as well as strategies for maximizing the benefits of the bankruptcy system for struggling debtors.

Even before the first discussion in Newport at the 2011 ABI Consumer Forum, practitioners have experienced the difficulties inherent with managing a client with a mental illness or impairment. There can be even more challenges to managing any client matter when an opposing party suffers from a mental illness, especially when that party is self-represented. This panel of experienced practitioners and mental health professionals will discuss the evolving legal and practical issues surrounding mental illness and its impact on the bankruptcy system, as well as discuss methods of remaining calm in what can be an unpredictable and increasingly unavoidable storm.

This year’s installment of the Boris Badenough ethics play centers primarily around Boris’s romantic problems, rather than his traditional financial woes. Boris’s latest wife, Sophia “Sting” Shire, an up-and-coming photo artist, has just filed for divorce and is seeking to void her prenuptial agreement with Boris so she can get the $100,000 per week in support she believes she is entitled to. Boris isn’t distressed about the loss of his sixth (or is it seventh?) wife, but the fact she wants money and half of his massive snowglobe collection enrages him. However, Boris has a plan to put Sting into an involuntary bankruptcy with two other creditors, have a trustee appointed (Boris does know how to dig up dirt!) and settle any claims that Sting may have with her trustee for a small amount of his hoard. Unfortunately for Boris, Sting and her counsel, Bill “Bo” Baggins, have a few tricks of their own up their sleeves, including the discovery of Boris’s deepest and perhaps most profitable secrets in Hidden Hoard LLC, a company Sting owns 1% of (through Boris’s attempt to make her a minority contractor). Will Baggins and Sting be able to discover the secret Hidden Hoard, or will Boris’s counsel, Tom “Bomber” Dill, prevail and save his client’s “preeciousss”?

Discussion on the chapter 7 trustees’ powers to do a carve-out, the new use of short sales in chapter 7, and the most effective way to sell assets in today’s economic environment. Does the creditor have a say in the trustee’s course of action?

The panel will discuss the pitfalls that chapter 13 debtors encounter when dealing with claims that may or may not be dischargeable or have priority status.

As if the Bankruptcy Code doesn’t give us enough to ponder, bankruptcy practitioners must consider the impact of the U.S. Tax Code on the decision-making process. This session will address the Internal Revenue Code “section 1398 short year” election and separate entity rules, discharge of tax claims, cancellation of debt (COD) income, and tax issues arising from mortgage modification, foreclosure, and transfer or abandonment of property.

Individual chapter 11 cases pose a number of thorny legal and practical problems for the bankruptcy practitioner. While individual chapter 11 cases contain many elements of corporate chapter 11 and chapter 13 cases, they do not fit comfortably in either chapter. Following the enactment of BAPCPA, courts have struggled to strike the appropriate balance between the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code intended for corporations and those intended for human beings. The result is substantial uncertainty for debtors and creditors alike. This session will explore: Does the absolute priority rule apply to individual chapter 11 debtors? May creditors commence an involuntary chapter 11 case against an individual? May individual chapter 11 debtors pay their living expenses in the ordinary course of business, or is notice and a hearing required? What are the advantages and disadvantages for debtors and creditors in an individual chapter 11 case as compared to a corporate chapter 11 case or a chapter 13 case?