Call for a professional consult today 734.281.2050

Bankruptcy Cases in the News

Bankruptcy Cases in the News

In past blogs we have discussed the importance of the automatic stay, 11 USC 362 to the debtors fresh start and efforts to reorganize and get on with their lives. In a recently decided case from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court Eastern District of Louisiana, Judge Magner traced the importance of the automatic stay to debtors and severely punished a secured creditor, Wells Fargo (WF), for violating it. In this Chapter 13 case the judge found that WF willfully violated 11 USC 362, the automatic stay when it:

 

“Charged Debtor’s account with unreasonable fees and costs; failed to notify Debtor that any of these post-petition charges were being added to his account; failed to seek Court approval for the same; and paid itself out of estate funds delivered to it for payment of other debt.”

 

Accordingly in this case Michael L. Jones v. Wells Fargo Mortgage, Inc., 06-1093 (Eastern District of Louisiana) the court determined that there were very serious violations. As discussed in other blogs, the automatic stay is a central feature in assuring that the debtor gets a fresh start. In their case the creditor’s actions failed to allow the debtor a fresh start by wrongfully misapplying his payments to penalties, late fees and other costs WF was not entitled to.

 

In addition to the wrongful conduct WF apparently never conceded its violation but dug in and over litigated and filed appeals with dubious merit. The Court also believed that WF had treated other debtors wrongfully, too, in other cases. Therefore, Judge Magner held that not only were full compensatory damages due to debtor for all loses and attorney fees, but also punitive damages too. The opinion stated, in part:

 

“Section 362(k) allows for the award of actual damages, including costs and attorneys’ fees, as a result of a stay violation, and punitive damages “in appropriate circumstances.” Punitive damages are warranted when the conduct in question is willful and egregious, or when the defendant acted “with actual knowledge that he was violating the federally protected right or with reckless disregard of whether he was doing so.” There is no question that Wells Fargo’s conduct was willful. As previously decided Wells Fargo clearly knows of Debtor’s pending bankruptcy and was represented by bankruptcy counsel in the case. Wells Fargo is a sophisticated lender with thousands of claims in bankruptcy cases pending throughout the country and is familiar with the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, particularly those regarding the automatic stay.”

 

Judge Magner under the egregious circumstances of the case awarded to debtor $3,170,000.00 in punitive damages. This was done because WF’s behavior was reprehensible having caused 5 years of litigation; and, clandestine hiding its misconduct and failing to make voluntary corrections of its errors. It demonstrated “an arrogant defiance of Federal law.”
The Judge determined that based on all the circumstances that such a large award should be imposed to discourage future misconduct and benefit society at large. Judge Magner noted that the award might also deter others tempted to misconduct in the absence of such a deterrent.

If creditors harass you during your bankruptcy, or after, you should seek legal help immediately.

[Guy Vining, a bankruptcy attorney, in metro-Detroit, maintains his office in the city of Taylor, Michigan, where he serves the downriver communities of Monroe, South Rockwood, Gibraltar, Brownstown Township, Grosse Ile, Woodhaven, Trenton, Southgate, Riverview, Allen Park, Lincoln Park, Dearborn, Dearborn Heights, Westland, Wayne, and Ecorse. If you or a family member of friend would like a no-obligation no cost consultation/financial analysis, just call or E-mail Guy Vining of Vining Law Group, P.L.C to schedule a meeting.]

 

Bankruptcy Cases in the News

Bankruptcy Cases in the News


A recent 6th Circuit Court of Appeals Case (unpublished), in re: Tammy Martin, No. 11-8052 revisited and highlighted several important aspects of bankruptcy protections for debtors. In this interesting case the debtor was awarded significant attorney fees for creditor collection actions which continued post filing and post discharge. The Court began it’s analysis by discussing 11 USC 524(a)(2) and stating:

 

    “Section 524(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that a discharge “operates as an injunction against the commencement or continuation of an action, the employment of process, or an act, to collect, recover or offset… debt [discharge under section 727… of this title] as a personal liability of the debtor, whether or not discharge of such debt is waived.” 11 USC § 524(a) (2). The subsection, along with 11 USC § 524(a) (3), is commonly referred to as the “discharge injunction.” As the Ninth Circuit recognized,

 

        The discharge injunction [comes] into force by operation of law upon entry of the discharge. A discharge injunction …is … an equitable remedy precluding the creditor, on pain of contempt, from taking any actions to enforce the discharged debt.

Espinosa v. United Student Aid Funds, Inc., 553 F.3d 1193, 1200 (9th Cir. 2008), aff’d, 130 S. Ct. 1367 (2010) (internal citations omitted). Once a discharge issued, § 524(a) (2) and (3) makes permanent the protections afforded by § 362’s automatic stay and prohibits a creditor from pursuing collection efforts against the debtor personally for debts that were discharged in the bankruptcy proceeding. Gunter v. O’Brien & Assoc. Co., LPA (In re Gunter), 389 B.R. 67, 71 (Bankr. S.D. Ohio 2008). “The purpose of § 524(a) is to afford a debtor a ‘fresh start’ by ensuring that a debtor will not be pressured in any way to repay a debt after it has been discharged.” Paglia v. Sky Bank (In re Paglia), 302 B.R. 162, 166 (Bankr. W.D. Pa. 2003).”

The Court noted that the creditor’s post discharge actions were willful. In other words, the creditor deliberately acted with [actual] knowledge of the bankruptcy case. It noted that a creditor does not have a defense of ‘mistake’ or ‘good faith belief’ that its actions were lawful. Although the creditor would have a defense if the debt was properly reaffirmed or negotiated in a valid, and new post discharge contract.

Since the creditor did not have a viable defense the Court of Appeals affirmed (upheld) the decision of the Bankruptcy Court in determining the creditor was in contempt of court and subject to sanctions of money damages. The debtor was therefore entitled to have her incidental expenses and all reasonable attorney fees paid.

The case illustrates the protection of the Bankruptcy Court through its automatic stay provisions, 11 USC 362, during pendency of a case; and, the power of the Court to protect the debtor’s fresh start. If a creditor has harassed you during the pendency of your case or post discharge you should contact a bankruptcy attorney so that the action may be reviewed as to whether it constitutes contempt of the court.

[Guy Vining, a bankruptcy attorney, in metro-Detroit, maintains his office is in Taylor, Michigan, where he serves the downriver communities of Monroe, South Rockwood, Gibraltar, Brownstown Township, Grosse Ile, Woodhaven, Trenton, Southgate, Riverview, Allen Park, Lincoln Park, Dearborn, Dearborn Heights, Westland, Wayne, and Ecorse. If you or a family member of friend would like a no-obligation no cost consultation/financial analysis, just call or E-mail Guy Vining of Vining Law Group, P.L.C to schedule a meeting.]