From tecla at lewistonbankruptcylawyer.com Wed Feb 2 11:59:23 2022 From: tecla at lewistonbankruptcylawyer.com (Tecla Druffel) Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2022 18:59:23 +0000 Subject: [CLBS] Resources for debtor who may be blind Message-ID: Colleagues: Later today, I have an initial consult with a potential new client who may be blind. We are meeting via telephone today, but I was hoping to connect with anyone who may have experience representing a person with vision limitations and/or blindness in bankruptcy... Are there any resources out there that might be useful to her and/or me through this process? Her income is limited. My office will make every effort to accommodate her if she decides to hire me, but I would love any guidance or help if anyone has any experience in this arena or can point me in the right direction to learn more. Thanks, Tecla Tecla E. Druffel Attorney at Law TED BK, PLLC 312 Main Street P.O. Box 323 Lewiston, Idaho 83501 P: (208) 743-9569 F: (888) 877-4307 From holly at roarklawboise.com Fri Feb 4 13:02:01 2022 From: holly at roarklawboise.com (Holly Roark) Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2022 13:02:01 -0700 Subject: [CLBS] Question about grant of partial summary judgment under 523(a)(4) Message-ID: <08ed01d81a02$14ddb300$3e991900$@roarklawboise.com> I obtained a partial summary judgment under 523(a)(4) as to liability. The BK court (in CDCA) says it cannot make a determination of the amount without further order/clarification from the family court which entered the underlying judgment. My client is exhausted from the litigation, which is against her vexatious litigant ex-husband (Debtor). She wants to take her partial win and file a motion to dismiss the remaining claims. What is she left with if she does this? She?ll have a judgment for exception from discharge under 523(a)(4) but in an ambiguous amount. Assuming the Chapter 13 debtor completes his plan and gets his discharge and client is not paid in full, what happens then? Can she go back to family court later after the BK case is closed? Thereafter, would she need to return to the BK court adversary case to get a blessing on the ?amount owed? or do we have enough with this grant of our motion? My motion for summary judgment requested judgment under 523(a)(4) and (a)(6). The (a)(6) was always going to be tough, but the (a)(4) is clear. The Order says, IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is Granted in Part and Denied in Part as follows: As to Plaintiff?s request for judgment in the amount of $124,689.72 which includes accrued interest at 10% per annum through the bankruptcy petition filing date of February 26, 2021, plus continuing accruing interest at 10% per annum commencing February 27, 2021, until paid in full, on account of the Judgment (the ?Judgment?) entered on September 19, 2018, by the Family Court in Superior Court Case No. ______________, in favor of Plaintiff __________ and against Defendant _____________ and a determination that the $124,689.72 be determined non-dischargeable under 11 U.S.C. ? 523(a)(4) and 11 U.S.C. ? 523(a)(6), the Motion is GRANTED, in part, as follows: (a) 11 U.S.C. ? 523(a)(4): The amount owing, if any, on account of attorney?s fees and costs ordered to be paid as sanctions under the Judgment (the ?Judgment Sanctions Award?) is determined to be non-dischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. ? 523(a)(4); and (b) 11 U.S.C. ? 523(a)(6): (Discussion proceeds). In the Court?s memorandum, it states: Based on the foregoing, the amount owing under the Judgment on account of attorney?s fees and costs is determined to be nondischargeable pursuant to 11 U.S.C. ? 523(a)(4). However, for the reasons described above, the amount which remains owing under the Judgment on account of attorney?s fees and costs awarded as sanctions has not been established and does not appear capable of determination absent further ruling by the Family Court. I did not fine the court?s ?reasons described above? to be very clear at all. We have a judgment. We have proof of what client was paid. We have proof of what remains owed. We have proof of what was ordered as a ?sanction? for breach of fiduciary duty. I am perplexed as to why the court could not arrive at the amount we set forth. The BK court appears to want the family court to do some kind of allocating. However, case law says that the creditor can apply payments as creditor ?sees fit,? i.e. she can apply the payments to the dischargeable portion first, which she did. I provided this case law to the court. I spoke with client?s family law attorney who says what the BK court is asking for will be virtually impossible to get from the family court. My client wants out of this case. I am wondering if I should file a motion for clarification or for reconsideration, or if, like I asked in the beginning, we can just take our partial MSJ and walk. Thoughts? Best regards, HOLLY ROARK Attorney at Law Certified Bankruptcy Specialist - By the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization ROARK LAW OFFICES 950 Bannock Street | 11th Floor | Boise, Idaho 83702 Phone: (208) 536-3638 Fax: (310) 553-2601 E-mail: holly at roarklawboise.com *This communication does not create an attorney-client relationship. Unless you have signed a retainer agreement with Roark Law Offices, this communication may not be private or privileged. From PGeile at foleyfreeman.com Tue Feb 8 15:51:38 2022 From: PGeile at foleyfreeman.com (Patrick Geile) Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 22:51:38 +0000 Subject: [CLBS] Tax Lien Message-ID: Good Afternoon, I am having a rigorous discussion with Holly Sutherland regarding an Idaho state tax lien. Here is what we disagree on. 1. Does an Idaho state tax lien attach to a titled vehicle in Idaho if the State's interest is not listed as an owner or lienholder. Me being a poor poor trustee wants to sell debtor's vehicle and pay the equity to unsecured creditors, Holly wants to save that equity for the benefit of the State of Idaho, which is generous. I believe Gugino v. GMAC provides the law supporting my position. Any input from the members. Also see you all soon at the BEST SEMINAR EVER........ Patrick J. Geile Attorney [cid:image001.png at 01D81D03.C106DEF0] 953 S. Industry Way Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: 208-888-9111 Direct:208-947-1563 Fax: 208-888-5130 Website: https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/KyMZCn5kmOfX15jZs938E0?domain=foleyfreeman.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The preceding message (including attachment, if any) is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 2510-2521, is CONFIDENTIAL, and may also be protected by the ATTORNEY/CLIENT OR OTHER PRIVILEGE. If you believe that this message has been sent to you in error, do not read any further portion of the message other than the remainder of this notice, please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete the message. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. We do not waive any attorney/client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 5588 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Gugino_v_GMAC_In_re_Laursen_1824.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 47877 bytes Desc: Gugino_v_GMAC_In_re_Laursen_1824.pdf URL: From alex at cavallawoffice.com Tue Feb 8 16:22:13 2022 From: alex at cavallawoffice.com (Alexandra Caval) Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 16:22:13 -0700 Subject: [CLBS] Tax Lien In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Patrick, I don't think Gugino v GMAC helps your argument primarily because a statutory lien and a consensual lien are different and they are perfected differently. Laursen dealt with an unperfected lien caused by an error in Debtor's name on the certificate of title issued by the IDOT. However, the security interest in question was a consensual one. A consensual lien on the vehicle needs to comply with the IDOT recording requirements to be perfected. In Holly's case ISTC is asserting a statutory tax lien ( I.C. 63-3051) and I think all that's required to perfect a statutory tax lien as to personal property is recording it tax lien with the Secretary of State via the UCC portal. The only way I think you defeat the statutory lien is if the ISTC messed up the perfection (i.e. if they botch the name they recorded the lien under in the UCC filing system). I think you need to find a ground in 11 USC 545 to avoid the ISTC's statutory lien. Maybe you and Holly should invite the ISTC to the conversation. They might have an opinion on the matter :) Alex On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 3:53 PM Patrick Geile wrote: > Good Afternoon, > > I am having a rigorous discussion with Holly Sutherland regarding an Idaho > state tax lien. > > Here is what we disagree on. > > > 1. Does an Idaho state tax lien attach to a titled vehicle in Idaho if > the State's interest is not listed as an owner or lienholder. > > Me being a poor poor trustee wants to sell debtor's vehicle and pay the > equity to unsecured creditors, Holly wants to save that equity for the > benefit of the State of Idaho, which is generous. > > I believe Gugino v. GMAC provides the law supporting my position. > > Any input from the members. > > Also see you all soon at the BEST SEMINAR EVER........ > > > Patrick J. Geile > Attorney > [cid:image001.png at 01D81D03.C106DEF0] > 953 S. Industry Way > Meridian, ID 83642 > Phone: 208-888-9111 > Direct:208-947-1563 > Fax: 208-888-5130 > Website: https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/IyZuC2kNqWUV4vynCnhC6V?domain=foleyfreeman.com > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The preceding message (including attachment, if > any) is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. > sections 2510-2521, is CONFIDENTIAL, and may also be protected by the > ATTORNEY/CLIENT OR OTHER PRIVILEGE. If you believe that this message has > been sent to you in error, do not read any further portion of the message > other than the remainder of this notice, please reply to the sender that > you have received the message in error, and delete the message. If you are > not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, > dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly > prohibited. We do not waive any attorney/client or work product privilege > by the transmission of this message. > > _______________________________________________ > CLBS mailing list > CLBS at admws.idaho.gov > https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/PbE6C31XrwuXPwNLIqS1f8?domain=admws.idaho.gov > -- Alexandra O. Caval Caval Law Office, P.C. P.O. Box 1716 Twin Falls, ID 83303-01716 T: 208.733.2035 F: 208.733.3919 alex at cavallawoffice.com *PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE* This e-mail is intended only for the use of the recipient named and may contain information that is confidential, privileged, and exempt from disclosure under applicable laws. If you are not the named recipient, you may have received this transmission in error. We ask that you immediately notify the sender and remove this and all attached file(s) from your system. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver of the attorney-client or work-product privileges. You are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of any of the information contained in this transmission if you are not the intended recipient is prohibited and may expose you to liability. From rmaynes at eastidahocu.org Tue Feb 8 16:25:30 2022 From: rmaynes at eastidahocu.org (Robert J. Maynes) Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2022 23:25:30 +0000 Subject: [CLBS] Tax Lien In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Patrick, Great question! I don?t have an answer, but how does I.C. ? 45-1905 play into your analysis? Does it? Does ? 49-510 et seq. conflict with 45-1905? Kindest regards, Rob TITLE 45 LIENS, MORTGAGES AND PLEDGES CHAPTER 19 STATE LIENS 45-1905. EFFECT OF NOTICE ? PRIORITY. (1) When a notice of lien is filed, the state lien is perfected in all of the existing and after-acquired property of the debtor, both real and personal, tangible and intangible, to which the lien attaches pursuant to the relevant provisions of chapter 6 of title 45, title 63, chapter 13 of title 72, chapter 12 of title 7, or chapter 2 of title 56, Idaho Code. (2) As to personal property, the perfected lien shall have the same priority as a security interest which becomes perfected under chapter 9, title 28, Idaho Code, at the same time the notice of lien is filed. (3) As to real property, the perfected lien shall have the same priority as a mortgage which is recorded at the same time the notice of lien is filed. (4) Nothing herein limits the authority of the state tax commission to subordinate its lien to another lien in the manner provided by section 63-3055, Idaho Code. Robert J. Maynes, Esq. General Counsel "Whoever is happy will make others happy.? Anne Frank East Idaho Credit Union 865 S. Woodruff Ave. Idaho Falls, ID 83401 Phone: 208.523.9068 Ext. 3886 | Fax: 208.523.4755 Email: rmaynes at eastidahocu.org [cid:8DB15141-D1E2-43B7-8ADE-94BCC7093E54][cid:A5EC3B7E-92F6-4250-9FCA-A009501BE7D8][cid:image002.png at 01D69C9E.A028C2C0] Any personal opinions, conclusions, or other information expressed in the email are neither given nor endorsed by EICU. Please be aware that EICU will never request personal or financial information via unsecured email. Confidentiality Statement: The information contained in this email is intended for the recipient named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient or the intended recipient's agent, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of the information contained in this email is prohibited. If this email has reached you in error, you are asked to notify us as soon as possible. Thank you for your cooperation. On Feb 8, 2022, at 3:51 PM, Patrick Geile > wrote: *** [EXTERNAL] This message comes from an external organization. Please do not open any attachments or click on links unless you are 100% sure it?s legitimate. ***. Good Afternoon, I am having a rigorous discussion with Holly Sutherland regarding an Idaho state tax lien. Here is what we disagree on. 1. Does an Idaho state tax lien attach to a titled vehicle in Idaho if the State's interest is not listed as an owner or lienholder. Me being a poor poor trustee wants to sell debtor's vehicle and pay the equity to unsecured creditors, Holly wants to save that equity for the benefit of the State of Idaho, which is generous. I believe Gugino v. GMAC provides the law supporting my position. Any input from the members. Also see you all soon at the BEST SEMINAR EVER........ Patrick J. Geile Attorney [cid:image001.png at 01D81D03.C106DEF0] 953 S. Industry Way Meridian, ID 83642 Phone: 208-888-9111 Direct:208-947-1563 Fax: 208-888-5130 Website: https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/TBJACwpwyrUv47mnsQq0aB?domain=urldefense.proofpoint.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The preceding message (including attachment, if any) is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. sections 2510-2521, is CONFIDENTIAL, and may also be protected by the ATTORNEY/CLIENT OR OTHER PRIVILEGE. If you believe that this message has been sent to you in error, do not read any further portion of the message other than the remainder of this notice, please reply to the sender that you have received the message in error, and delete the message. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. We do not waive any attorney/client or work product privilege by the transmission of this message. _______________________________________________ CLBS mailing list CLBS at admws.idaho.gov https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/xLXRCxkxz1ULgyVjsAI9bV?domain=urldefense.proofpoint.com Any personal opinions, conclusions, or other information expressed in the email are neither given nor endorsed by EICU. Please be aware that EICU will never request personal or financial information via unsecured email. If you need to send something securely, please make the request. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2021.05.06_Screen Shot 2021-05-06 at 10.21.49 AM.png Type: image/png Size: 42597 bytes Desc: 2021.05.06_Screen Shot 2021-05-06 at 10.21.49 AM.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 26860 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: PastedGraphic-1.tiff Type: image/tiff Size: 31564 bytes Desc: PastedGraphic-1.tiff URL: From paul at idbankruptcylaw.com Wed Feb 9 15:02:43 2022 From: paul at idbankruptcylaw.com (Paul Ross) Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2022 15:02:43 -0700 Subject: [CLBS] Tax Lien In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Counties do a stop title on medical indigency liens somewhat commonly. I have never seen the medical indigency liens show on title, they are filed with SOS. This would be the same. The question is whether the ITC will assert their lien, not whether it is perfected. Paul On Tue, Feb 8, 2022, 16:24 Alexandra Caval wrote: > Patrick, > > I don't think Gugino v GMAC helps your argument primarily because a > statutory lien and a consensual lien are different and they are perfected > differently. Laursen dealt with an unperfected lien caused by an error in > Debtor's name on the certificate of title issued by the IDOT. However, the > security interest in question was a consensual one. A consensual lien on > the vehicle needs to comply with the IDOT recording requirements to be > perfected. In Holly's case ISTC is asserting a statutory tax lien ( I.C. > 63-3051) and I think all that's required to perfect a statutory tax lien as > to personal property is recording it tax lien with the Secretary of State > via the UCC portal. The only way I think you defeat the statutory lien is > if the ISTC messed up the perfection (i.e. if they botch the name they > recorded the lien under in the UCC filing system). I think you need to find > a ground in 11 USC 545 to avoid the ISTC's statutory lien. Maybe you and > Holly should invite the ISTC to the conversation. They might have an > opinion on the matter :) > > Alex > > On Tue, Feb 8, 2022 at 3:53 PM Patrick Geile > wrote: > > > Good Afternoon, > > > > I am having a rigorous discussion with Holly Sutherland regarding an > Idaho > > state tax lien. > > > > Here is what we disagree on. > > > > > > 1. Does an Idaho state tax lien attach to a titled vehicle in Idaho if > > the State's interest is not listed as an owner or lienholder. > > > > Me being a poor poor trustee wants to sell debtor's vehicle and pay the > > equity to unsecured creditors, Holly wants to save that equity for the > > benefit of the State of Idaho, which is generous. > > > > I believe Gugino v. GMAC provides the law supporting my position. > > > > Any input from the members. > > > > Also see you all soon at the BEST SEMINAR EVER........ > > > > > > Patrick J. Geile > > Attorney > > [cid:image001.png at 01D81D03.C106DEF0] > > 953 S. Industry Way > > Meridian, ID 83642 > > Phone: 208-888-9111 > > Direct:208-947-1563 > > Fax: 208-888-5130 > > Website: https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/jdW9CXDlX5S4RJD4s6P3ed?domain=foleyfreeman.com > > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The preceding message (including attachment, if > > any) is covered by the Electronic Communication Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. > > sections 2510-2521, is CONFIDENTIAL, and may also be protected by the > > ATTORNEY/CLIENT OR OTHER PRIVILEGE. If you believe that this message has > > been sent to you in error, do not read any further portion of the message > > other than the remainder of this notice, please reply to the sender that > > you have received the message in error, and delete the message. If you > are > > not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any retention, > > dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication is strictly > > prohibited. We do not waive any attorney/client or work product privilege > > by the transmission of this message. > > > > _______________________________________________ > > CLBS mailing list > > CLBS at admws.idaho.gov > > https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/K77zCYEmY5UDq8pDTGJyIk?domain=admws.idaho.gov > > > > > -- > > Alexandra O. Caval > > Caval Law Office, P.C. > > P.O. Box 1716 > > Twin Falls, ID 83303-01716 > > T: 208.733.2035 > > F: 208.733.3919 > > alex at cavallawoffice.com > > > > > *PRIVILEGE AND CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE* > This e-mail is intended only for the use of the recipient named and may > contain information that is confidential, privileged, and exempt from > disclosure under applicable laws. If you are not the named recipient, you > may have received this transmission in error. We ask that you immediately > notify the sender and remove this and all attached file(s) from your > system. Receipt by anyone other than the intended recipient is not a waiver > of the attorney-client or work-product privileges. You are hereby notified > that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of any of the > information contained in this transmission if you are not the intended > recipient is prohibited and may expose you to liability. > _______________________________________________ > CLBS mailing list > CLBS at admws.idaho.gov > https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/K77zCYEmY5UDq8pDTGJyIk?domain=admws.idaho.gov > > From holly at roarklawboise.com Wed Feb 9 16:59:57 2022 From: holly at roarklawboise.com (Holly Roark) Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2022 16:59:57 -0700 Subject: [CLBS] Need recommendation for lender who can refi Debtor in Chapter 13 with 613 credit score Message-ID: <03c001d81e11$24a5e9c0$6df1bd40$@roarklawboise.com> Debtor is looking to refinance and pull out funds to pay off mortgage 100% of plan but cannot seem to find lender who will refi. Debtor has 613 credit score and claims that house value has risen such that there may be $250K-$300K in equity. 100% of plan including secured and priority is about $250K. He tried ICCU, no luck. Please send me your recommendations. Thank you. Best regards, HOLLY ROARK Attorney at Law Certified Bankruptcy Specialist - By the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization ROARK LAW OFFICES 950 Bannock Street | 11th Floor | Boise, Idaho 83702 Phone: (208) 536-3638 Fax: (310) 553-2601 E-mail: holly at roarklawboise.com *This communication does not create an attorney-client relationship. Unless you have signed a retainer agreement with Roark Law Offices, this communication may not be private or privileged. From tecla at lewistonbankruptcylawyer.com Wed Feb 16 13:25:46 2022 From: tecla at lewistonbankruptcylawyer.com (Tecla Druffel) Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:25:46 +0000 Subject: [CLBS] Interesting article/charts from JDP Message-ID: Hi all, Please see the attached article forwarded from Judge Pappas. Kind regards, Tecla Tecla E. Druffel Attorney at Law TED BK, PLLC 312 Main Street P.O. Box 323 Lewiston, Idaho 83501 P: (208) 743-9569 F: (888) 877-4307 From: Carol Mills Sent: Wednesday, February 16, 2022 9:43 AM To: Tecla Druffel Subject: FW: interesting article/charts Hi Tecla, Judge Pappas forwarded this article to me to share with the list serve, but I have no list serve powers. The article, written by a bankruptcy judge in Utah, has lots of interesting statistics on COVID credit card debt. I would appreciate it if you could either put it on the list serve or forward it to someone who can. Thank you! Carol [cid:image001.png at 01D82321.BA6EDBF0] Carol Keating Mills Career Law Clerk to Chief Bankr. Judge Joseph M. Meier, U.S. Courts, District of Idaho carol_mills at id.uscourts.gov (208) 334-9947 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.png Type: image/png Size: 33021 bytes Desc: image001.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.png Type: image/png Size: 86 bytes Desc: image002.png URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Drilling Down on Consumer Debt.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 277641 bytes Desc: Drilling Down on Consumer Debt.pdf URL: From holly at roarklawboise.com Thu Feb 24 13:36:25 2022 From: holly at roarklawboise.com (Holly Roark) Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2022 13:36:25 -0700 Subject: [CLBS] Question for Chapter 7 Trustees, and Chapter 11 attorneys re preference recoveries (taxable event?) Message-ID: <022801d829be$31eb0300$95c10900$@roarklawboise.com> When you recover a preference, is this a taxable event to the Debtors? I have a creditor who issued a 1099 to my Chapter 11 client under the theory that the funds returned were funds for "settlement of a lawsuit" (the preference adversary proceeding we filed), and thus taxable. I have not seen this before and my thought is that the funds returned to the Debtor (actually to the estate) should be construed as a discharged debt. Had the preference payments never been made, then it would have been an outstanding balance that was discharged in the BK. How is this different? Just because we "settled" on an amount? Best regards, HOLLY ROARK Attorney at Law Certified Bankruptcy Specialist - By the State Bar of California Board of Legal Specialization ROARK LAW OFFICES 950 Bannock Street | 11th Floor | Boise, Idaho 83702 Phone: (208) 536-3638 Fax: (310) 553-2601 E-mail: holly at roarklawboise.com *This communication does not create an attorney-client relationship. Unless you have signed a retainer agreement with Roark Law Offices, this communication may not be private or privileged. -- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://protect-us.mimecast.com/s/3ZqHC2kNqWUKVx8lcngkiv?domain=avast.com