Hamilton v. Lanning case can make bankruptcy easier
On March 21, 2010 the Supreme Court published an opinion on Hamilton vs. Lanning. Although the case is just one of the many like it, this one in particular has a significant impact on the way bankruptcies are filed. Not only does it allow the debtor to change the way they look at their current situation, but it also affects the way attorneys do as well. It doesn’t alter the actual process of how bankruptcies are filed, except when you look at the numbers, which makes quite a big impact on the debtor.
Traditionally, Texas bankruptcy cases have been determined by a mechanical approach which uses your past to define your future, but things are changing in the laws. As a result, people were left to rely on their past to determine their future. But what if your financial situation changes? Perhaps you have been laid off and you are no longer making the money you were three months ago. This is going to drastically affect your means test, which determines what type of bankruptcy you are eligible to file for. The Lanning ruling allows more realistic projections to affect the results of your bankruptcy.
More recently, people have been applying for modifications if their financial status severely changes. The Lanning ruling helps avoid modifications by allowing the debtor a more realistic viewing of their current financial status. The wording of the new law refers to projected income which is merely a prediction of what your income is going to look like based on things that are already known or are even definite. Presenting this information to the judge may take some preparation time, which ultimately delays the process.
Unfortunately filing for bankruptcy for most people in Dallas is a time sensitive process and may want to be done as quickly as possible. As much as the Lanning ruling helps the debtor it can have negative effects, but as a whole the advantage far outweighs the disadvantages. This monumental change is a rational movement towards financial stability, and simply the most practical way to identify what the debtor can and cannot afford.
View full post on Dallas Bankruptcy Lawyer
Did not file tax returns before needing a bankruptcy case
PC has approximately 1 million dollars in tax debt from 2002-2003. A
tax lien exists for this debt. PC filed his taxes in those years and
showed that he owed the amount-there is not suspicion of evasion or
fraud. It’s simply an amount he owes that he is unable to pay.
However, PC did not file from 2005-2008, and is currently filing those
taxes with an account, who estimates the liability at approximately
100k. I’ve already explained to PC that there probably nothing that
bk can do with respect to those more recent tax debts that are
currently being filed (and which will thus be priority debts).
PC also has unsecured debts to two former employers totally 1.25
million. PC is a former floor trader, and these funds were seed
capital for trading. These are unsecured debts.
PC does not own a home, rents for $1500/month, and owns only some
personal goods (clothes, furniture) and a 2003 Land Rover with 100k
miles.
Discharging Taxes in Bankruptcy by King is supposed to be the mother of all
books on this topic. The bible as others like to refer to it.
View full post on Dallas Bankruptcy Lawyer
The case presented in the chapter 13
I am representing a Plaintiff in an action to collect on a breached
promissory note. This past Monday, I received D’s Answer and I began
drafting my motion for SJ. Today, D’s counsel filed a “Suggestion of
Bankruptcy,” stating that D had filed for voluntary Chapter 13 in bankruptcy court
last week. Enter appearance in bankruptcy. File proof of claim in bankruptcy. Your
issues may be exclusively dealt with in the bankruptcy. On the other hand,
if debtor does not complete Chapter 13, you may be able to proceed in state
court. Do nothing in state court unless the bankruptcy is dismissed or you
file and win a motion to lift stay.
View full post on Oklahoma Bankruptcy News
