Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Ninth Circuit: Debt In Asset Case Is Nondischargeable If Debtor Fails to Properly Schedule the Debt
In a recent published decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit addressed a previously unresolved question in that circuit: whether a debtor's failure to properly schedule a debt in an "asset case" renders the debt nondischargeable. Answering the question in the affirmative, the court held that, with the exception of a "no asset" bankruptcy case, a debt is nondischargeable in its entirety if the debtor fails to properly schedule the debt. See, In re Licup, 95 F.4th 1234 (9th Cir. 2024).
Background
In this case, creditor Jefferson Avenue Temecula LLC filed an unlawful detainer action against Christine Tracy Castro in 2012. In January 2013, Jefferson obtained a default judgment against Castro that included a monetary award to Jefferson in the amount of $31,780.29.
In February 2014, Castro and her husband, Edwin C. Licup, filed a voluntary Chapter 7 petition. Although Castro and Licup submitted the required schedule, or list, of their creditors' names and mailing addresses (also known as a creditor matrix), the document listed an incorrect address for Jefferson's counsel. Although there were assets for the trustee to distribute in the case, Jefferson never filed a proof of claim. It was undisputed that Jefferson failed to receive notice of the bankruptcy filing, and otherwise did not have knowledge of it in time to timely file a claim. The debtors later received a discharge that listed the debt owed to Jefferson as discharged. The bankruptcy case was closed in September 2016.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
'Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P.': A Tutorial On Contract Liability for Real Estate Purchasers
In June 2024, the First Department decided Huguenot LLC v. Megalith Capital Group Fund I, L.P., which resolved a question of liability for a group of condominium apartment buyers and in so doing, touched on a wide range of issues about how contracts can obligate purchasers of real property.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.