United Bank has appealed to the Sixth Circuit BAP, the issue of whether Caulkett extends to lien stripping in chapter 13. The bankruptcy court held that it does not. In re Travers, No. 15-50844 (Bankr. E.D. Ky. Nov. 16, 2015) on appeal, No. 15-8051 (B.A.P. 6th Cir. filed Dec. 1, 2015). Read More
Brief Code SectionsSearch Results for: caulkett
-
Sixth Circuit BAP to Address Impact of Caulkett in Chapter 13
Posted by NCBRC - February 10th, 2016
-
Caulkett Does Not Apply in Chapter 13
Posted by NCBRC - September 29th, 2015
Following the decision in Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett, 575 U.S. ___, 2015 WL 2464049 (June 1, 2015), that wholly unsecured liens could not be stripped off in chapter 7, there was a flurry of concern that courts, at the behest of trustees and creditors, would revisit the issue of lien-stripping in chapter 13. That fear is quietly being laid to rest.
Strip-down of partially secured liens in chapter 7 was prohibited by Dewsnup v. Timm, 502 U. S. 410 (1992), and the Caulkett decision extended that holding to wholly unsecured liens. In chapter 13, however, appellate courts have consistently found that the reasoning in the decision in Nobelman v. American Savings Bank, 508 U. S. 324 (1993), which also prohibits strip-down of partially secured liens, permits strip-off of wholly unsecured liens. The difference being that, unlike chapter 7, where the Dewsnup Court found that section 506(d) does not provide a mechanism for lien-stripping, chapter 13 has its own mechanism in section 1322(b) for stripping off unsecured liens.
Since this summer’s decision in Caulkett, courts have largely, and correctly, found that that case does not apply in chapter 13 lien-strip cases. See, e.g., Green Tree Servicing v. Wilson, No. 14-9543 (S.D. N.Y. June 5, 2015) (“The recent Supreme Court decision on lien stripping, Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett, has no effect on the Bankruptcy Court’s order granting the Pond motion because Caulkett only applies in the Chapter 7 context.”); Kresl v. Beneficial Nebraska, No. 15-8016 (Bankr. D. Neb. Sept. 24, 2015); Osbourn v. Wells Fargo Financial Bank, No. 12-80485, Adv. Pro. 15-8007 (Bankr. D. Neb. Sept. 21, 2015); In re Ricci-Breen, No. 14-22798 (Bankr. S.D. N.Y. Aug. 31, 2015); Young v. Green Tree Servicing, No 14-41518, Adv. Pro. 15-4016 (Bankr. D. Neb. Aug. 18, 2015); Landron v. Banco Popular de Puerto Rico Oriental Bank, No. 13-7968 (Bankr. D. P.R. June 25, 2015) (all recognizing that Caulkett limited to chapter 7).
But, lest anyone get too comfortable with these cases, see, Davis v. Springleaf Financial Services, No. 15-4020 (Bankr. S.D. Ga. Sept. 9, 2015) (speculating in dictum that the decision in Caulkett could cause a change in current lien-stripping law in chapter 13).
-
Caulkett Does Not Affect Lien-Stripping in Chapter 13
Posted by NCBRC - June 22nd, 2015
The recent Supreme Court decision in Bank of America v. Caulkett, ___ U.S. ___, 2015 WL 2464049 (June 1, 2015), does not apply to lien stripping in chapter 13. Turman v. Pinnacle Bank, No. 14-80062, Adv. Proc. 14-8035 (Bankr. D. Neb. June 12, 2015). Alton and Leslie Turman’s residence was subject to two liens, the second of which was wholly unsecured. Relying on Minnesota Housing Fin. Agency v. Schmidt (In re Schmidt), 765 F.3d 877 (8th Cir. 2014), and noting that seven other circuits have found that wholly unsecured liens may be stripped off in chapter 13, the court granted the debtors’ motion for summary judgment to avoid Pinnacle Bank’s lien. The court briefly reiterated the well-established interpretation of Nobelman v. American Sav. Bank, 508 U.S. 324 (1993), that a lien that is wholly unsecured under section 506(a) is not a “secured claim” subject to the anti-modification provision of section 1322(b)(2) and may, therefore, be stripped off.
Allaying fears that Caulkett negatively impacted chapter 13 practice, the court stated definitively, “This case is unaffected by the recent United States Supreme Court decision of Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett, ___ U.S. ___, 2015 WL 2464049 (June 1, 2015) (holding that Chapter 7 debtors may not strip off wholly unsecured liens), because Caulkett applies only to Chapter 7 cases. Id. at *5” The court also cited Green Tree Servicing, LLC v. Wilson (In re Wilson), Case No. 14–CV–9543 (CS), 2015 WL 3561476 at *6 n.10 (S.D.N.Y. June 5, 2015). In that case the New York district court, likewise noted that “The recent Supreme Court decision on lien stripping, Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett, has no effect on the Bankruptcy Court’s order granting the [lien-stripping] motion because Caulkett only applies in the Chapter 7 context.”
-
Bank of Amer. v. Caulkett, No. 13-1421, Bank of Amer. v. Toledo-Cardona, No.14-163 (S.Ct.)
Posted by NCBRC - February 27th, 2015
Type: Amicus
Date: February 23, 2015
Description: Whether wholly unsecured lien may be stripped in chapter 7.
Result: Reversed and Remanded, June 1, 2015 -
Challenge to Dewsnup Moving Up
Posted by NCBRC - September 22nd, 2020
When the debtors filed for chapter 7 bankruptcy, they had two outstanding mortgages on their residence. The first was partially secured and the second was fully underwater. The debtors filed an adversary complaint seeking to strip down the partially secured senior lien. The bankruptcy court, compelled by Dewsnup v.Timm, 502 U.S. 410 (1992) and Bank of America, N.A. v. Caulkett, 575 U.S. 790 (2015), granted the creditor’s motion to dismiss. In re Vasquez, No. 19-1841, Adv. Proc. No. 19-100 (Bankr. E.D. N.C. March 25, 2020). Agreeing with the bankruptcy court’s “thorough analysis and conclusions,” the district court affirmed. In re Vasquez, No. 20-62 (E.D. N.C. Aug. 2020). Read More
-
Court Relies on, then Discusses Problems with, Dewsnup
Posted by NCBRC - April 21st, 2020
Finding that the case was governed by Dewsnup, a bankruptcy court granted the lien creditor’s motion to dismiss the chapter 7 debtors’ complaint seeking to strip down its partially unsecured lien. Vasquez v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, No. 19-1841, Adv. Proc. No. 19-100 (Bankr. E.D. N.C. March 25, 2020).
The chapter 7 debtors initiated a challenge to the controversial decision in Dewsnup v.Timm, 502 U.S. 410 (1992), when they sought to strip down a partially underwater lien held by JPMorgan. Given that, in 1992, the Supreme Court prohibited chapter 7 lien stripping of partially secured liens, the bankruptcy court did the only thing it could do and dismissed the complaint. Acknowledging the problematic nature of the decision in Dewsnup, however, the court went on to examine that case more closely. Read More
-
District Court Gets it Wrong in Chapter 13 Lien Strip Case
Posted by NCBRC - August 12th, 2016
A district court in Maryland mistakenly applied section 506(d) when it held that a debtor may not strip off a wholly unsecured lien in chapter 13 where the creditor failed to file a proof of claim. Burkhart v. Community Bank of Tri-County, No. 14-315 (D. Md. July 27, 2016).
Edwin Michael, and Teresa Stein Burkhart’s home was subject to several liens, two of which were held by Tri-County and were wholly unsecured. Tri-County did not file a proof of claim in the Burkharts’ bankruptcy. The Burkharts filed an adversary complaint seeking to strip off the wholly unsecured liens under section 1322(b). Tri-County did not respond and the Burkharts moved for default judgment.
The bankruptcy court relied on section 506(d)(2), which provides: “to the extent that a lien secures a claim against the debtor that is not an allowed secured claim, such lien is void, unless . . . such claim is not an allowed secured claim due only to the failure of any entity to file a proof of such claim. . .” Because Tri-County had not filed a proof of claim, the court held its liens could not be stripped. (The court granted default judgment against PNC, the holder of another wholly unsecured junior lien, because PNC had filed a timely proof of claim). Read More
-
Previously Discharged Personal Liability Does Not Count Toward Debt Limit
Posted by NCBRC - January 7th, 2016
The unsecured debt limit circumscribing eligibility for chapter 13 bankruptcy does not include personal liability on wholly unsecured liens where that liability was discharged in a prior chapter 7 case. Free v. Maliaer (In re Free), No. 14-1395 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. Dec. 17, 2015). Read More
-
Bankruptcy Court Takes Dewsnup to Task
Posted by NCBRC - December 3rd, 2015
In an opinion succinctly pointing out the primary faults of the much-maligned Dewsnup decision, Bankruptcy Judge Magner narrowly interpreted and distinguished Dewsnup to find that a wholly unsecured, nonconsensual judicial lien may be stripped in chapter 7. In re Mayer, 2015 WL 7424327, No. 2:13-bk-13220 (Bankr. E.D. La. Nov. 20, 2015). Read More
-
Ninth Circuit Permits Lien-Voidance in Chapter 20
Posted by NCBRC - October 2nd, 2015
In an elegant opinion employing judicial tools of plain text reading, simple logic, and historical context, the Ninth Circuit joined the “Fourth and Eleventh Circuits in concluding that Chapter 20 debtors may permanently void liens upon the successful completion of their confirmed Chapter 13 plan irrespective of their eligibility to obtain a discharge.” HSBC Bank v. Blendheim (In re Blendheim), No. 13-35412 (Oct. 1, 2015). Read More
-
Request Assistance
Request assistance with a case.
-
Help NCBRC
NCBRC needs your support to protect the rights of consumer bankruptcy debtors. The most effective way to support NCBRC is with a direct donation.
There are many other ways to give to NRBRC:
iGive.com: When you purchase items at over 1,400 online stores, a percentage of your purchase will be donated to NCBRC. Stores include Macy’s, Melissa and Doug, Bed Bath & Beyond, Nike, Petsmart, and more. Shop and Give today!
-
HAVEN Act Guide
The Honoring American Veterans in Extreme Need Act of 2019 (“HAVEN Act”) excludes certain benefits paid to veterans or their family members from the definition of current monthly income (“CMI”) found in the Bankruptcy Code. The HAVEN Act amends § 101(10A) of the Bankruptcy Code and supplements the 2005 amendments to the Code that excluded other government benefits, such as social security income.
This Guide provides an overview of the HAVEN Act identifies benefits that are excluded, and answers frequently asked questions.
-
Keep up with NCBRC
Thank you!
Thank you to the following organizations without whose support our work would not be possible.
American College of Bankruptcy
The American College of Bankruptcy is an honorary public service association of bankruptcy and insolvency professionals who are invited to join as Fellows based on a proven record of the highest standards of professionalism plus service to the profession and their communities. Together with its affiliated Foundation, the College is the largest financial supporter of bankruptcy and insolvency-related pro bono legal service programs in the United States.NACBA
The only national organization dedicated to serving the needs of consumer bankruptcy attorneys and protecting the rights of consumer debtors in bankruptcy. Formed in 1992, NACBA has more than 3,000 members located in all 50 states and Puerto Rico.O. Max Gardner Foundation, Inc.
Visit NACBA.org
The O. Max Gardner Foundation, Inc. provides financial support to institutions devoted to charitable, scientific, literary or educational purposes. NCBRC has been a recipient of grant awards from the foundation.