The Law of Reopening: Revisited
See >>>
http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/press/articles/abi012001.pdf
<<<
Reopening a closed no-asset consumer bankruptcy case to add a forgotten creditor -- may not be necessary ... Many districts do not reopen cases... it's irrelevant... effectively, in a no-asset Chapter 7 case, any and all dischargeable debts are discharged, whether or not they were listed on the matrix and included in the Schedule F... So, sending them the first page of your petiton and case number and discharge date should suffice...
---
"The Law of Reopening: Revisited"
By Alexander L. Edgar (1)
Assistant U.S. Trustee, South Bend, Ind.
It seems to happen all the time. A debtor files a Chapter 7 petition and within several months receives her §727 discharge. (2) Shortly thereafter, the bankruptcy clerk's office closes the case pursuant to §350(a) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 5009 (Fed. R. Bankr. P.).
Within months, the debtor is contacted by a long forgotten landlord, credit card issuer, or relative whose debt was not listed on the schedule of creditors and who is now demanding payment of it. The nervous debtor contacts her bankruptcy counsel and explains that her failure to list the debt was a mistake, the result of forgetfulness or inadvertence. The harried attorney says "No problem," and directs his paralegal to draft a motion to reopen this closed no-asset consumer bankruptcy case. The attorney plans to follow this by filing a motion to amend Schedule F, to add the name of the omitted unsecured creditor and the amount of that debt. (3) The clerk's office processes the pleadings, and in due course the bankruptcy court enters an order granting the requested relief.
... where there is no claim of nondischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(2), (4) or (6), the discharge entered for the debtors makes it unnecessary to reopen the case and schedule the omitted debt ... --- Therefore, in a case where there are no assets to be distributed to creditors, no relief to be accorded to the discharged debtor, and no "other cause" shown for reopening, the courts should adopt the Madaj analysis and decline to reopen the debtor's Chapter 7 bankruptcy case to add an omitted creditor because of the plain language of §350(b), §727(b), §523(a) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2002(e). Scheduling an omitted creditor in a reopened case is irrelevant to discharging the unlisted debt. Thus, in the typical no-asset consumer case, the debtor must articulate a specific reason qualifying as "other cause" under §350(b) in order to justify reopening and obtain relief.
http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/press/articles/abi012001.htm
http://www.furl.net/item.jsp?id=5496057
Any comments?
See >>>
http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/press/articles/abi012001.pdf
<<<
Reopening a closed no-asset consumer bankruptcy case to add a forgotten creditor -- may not be necessary ... Many districts do not reopen cases... it's irrelevant... effectively, in a no-asset Chapter 7 case, any and all dischargeable debts are discharged, whether or not they were listed on the matrix and included in the Schedule F... So, sending them the first page of your petiton and case number and discharge date should suffice...
---
"The Law of Reopening: Revisited"
By Alexander L. Edgar (1)
Assistant U.S. Trustee, South Bend, Ind.
It seems to happen all the time. A debtor files a Chapter 7 petition and within several months receives her §727 discharge. (2) Shortly thereafter, the bankruptcy clerk's office closes the case pursuant to §350(a) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 5009 (Fed. R. Bankr. P.).
Within months, the debtor is contacted by a long forgotten landlord, credit card issuer, or relative whose debt was not listed on the schedule of creditors and who is now demanding payment of it. The nervous debtor contacts her bankruptcy counsel and explains that her failure to list the debt was a mistake, the result of forgetfulness or inadvertence. The harried attorney says "No problem," and directs his paralegal to draft a motion to reopen this closed no-asset consumer bankruptcy case. The attorney plans to follow this by filing a motion to amend Schedule F, to add the name of the omitted unsecured creditor and the amount of that debt. (3) The clerk's office processes the pleadings, and in due course the bankruptcy court enters an order granting the requested relief.
... where there is no claim of nondischargeability pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(2), (4) or (6), the discharge entered for the debtors makes it unnecessary to reopen the case and schedule the omitted debt ... --- Therefore, in a case where there are no assets to be distributed to creditors, no relief to be accorded to the discharged debtor, and no "other cause" shown for reopening, the courts should adopt the Madaj analysis and decline to reopen the debtor's Chapter 7 bankruptcy case to add an omitted creditor because of the plain language of §350(b), §727(b), §523(a) and Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2002(e). Scheduling an omitted creditor in a reopened case is irrelevant to discharging the unlisted debt. Thus, in the typical no-asset consumer case, the debtor must articulate a specific reason qualifying as "other cause" under §350(b) in order to justify reopening and obtain relief.
http://www.usdoj.gov/ust/press/articles/abi012001.htm
http://www.furl.net/item.jsp?id=5496057
Any comments?
Last edited: