Latest from Bankruptcy Mastery

Don’t miss today’s NACBA webinar on California exemptions, airing at 2 p.m. We’ll look at new exemptions taking effect on January 1, 2023, along with the return of ride-through and lots more. This is a NACBA members-only presentation that you can’t afford to miss. New NACBA members get free admission. Everyone gets information critical to

Not every expenditure that benefits the debtor’s household or his family is a household expense. And, if it’s not a household expense, it doesn’t get added to CMI in a single spouse bankruptcy filing. That’s how the marital adjustment should work. But it’s not so simple. Household expense is not an expansive definition During a NACBA

I’m presenting an hour-plus webinar September 22, 2022 at 1 p.m. PDT for NACBA members only on the craft of fee applications. Join me for a distillation of what I’ve learned doing fee applications for 40+ years. The focus will be on the practical, rather than the legal. The cost is just $25 for NACBA

For Californians, the CA Supreme Court’s decision in Brace upended our understanding of joint tenancy and community property. For decades, we “knew” that a property couldn’t be both joint tenancy and community property . Siberell. And for those of us in the 9th Circuit, we “knew” that when married folks acquired property with title taken

As lawyers, words are our stock in trade. If we want to describe, explain, or persuade, we need to use the right word. The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter – ’tis the difference between the lightning-bug and the lightning.  MARK TWAIN I was blown away

I’ve been having nightmares about the 9th’s Circuit’s decision in Siegel for 20 years. Broad strokes, Siegel (143 F.3d 525 (9th Cir. 1998) holds that a filed claim in a no asset bankruptcy case to which no one objects is entitled to preclusive effect in subsequent litigation by reason of Bankruptcy Code §502. In Siegel,

I’ve been having nightmares about the 9th’s Circuit’s decision in Siegel for 20 years. Broad strokes, Siegel (143 F.3d 525 (9th Cir. 1998) holds that a filed claim in a no asset bankruptcy case to which no one objects is entitled to preclusive effect in subsequent litigation by reason of Bankruptcy Code §502. In Siegel,

Chapter 13 bankruptcy can discharge any non support obligations associated with a divorce. That’s worth repeating: any marital settlement agreement or court judgment that calls for payment or indemnity by one spouse to the other in the future is potentially vulnerable to a subsequent bankruptcy filing by the obligor-spouse. While obligations deemed to be “support”