Husband Not Denied Bankruptcy Discharge Because of Wife’s Felonious Conduct.

In the case of In re Rodenbaugh, 431 B.R. 473 (Bankr. E.D. Mo. 2010), the bankruptcy court addressed whether a husband would be denied a bankruptcy discharge because of his ambivalence to the family finances while his wife was engaging in willful and malicious conduct. In Rodenbaugh, the wife and husband filed a joint bankruptcy case attempting to discharge debts relating to the wife’s felonious theft of $314,327 from her ex-employer. The husband did not participate in the wife’s theft.


The wife deposited the stolen funds into a joint bank account shared with her husband. The husband admitted that he benefited from the wife’s theft in that some of the stolen funds were used to pay family expenses. The husband also admits that he had spent some of the stolen funds; however, he did so without any knowledge of the preceding crimes. The husband maintained that he became aware of the wife’s crime only after her termination from the wife’s employer. Finally, the husband testified at the trial that he had never noticed any superfluous funds in the joint bank account because he allowed the wife to pay the bills and was ambivalent to the family finances.

The wife’s ex-employer objected to the husband’s discharge pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(6) claiming that the financial obligation to repay the stolen funds should be excepted from discharge. The employer argued that the debt should be excepted from discharge as to the husband too because the husband knew of, or was willfully blind to the wife’s theft and therefore the husband’s actions were willful an malicious towards the ex-employer. The ex-employer argued that at the very least, the husband’s actions were reckless and as such any debt excepted from the wife’s discharge should be imputed to him as well.

The husband opposed the exception to discharge. The husband argued that the standard of willful and malicious conduct cannot be attributed to the husband because at all relevant times, the husband was not aware of the wife’s criminal actions and did not conspire, condone, contribute or encourage said criminal actions.

The court ruled in favor of the husband. The court began its analysis by noting that debts arising from willful and malicious injury by a debtor are excepted from discharge under 11 U.S.C. §523(a)(6). Wilfulness and maliciousness are two distinct elements of §523(a)(6). To prove willfulness, the creditor must show by a preponderance of the evidence that debtor intended the injury, not just a deliberate or intentional act leading to injury. Debts arising from recklessly or negligently inflicted injuries do not fall within the compass of §523(a)(6). But, the court did recognize that acts intrinsically meriting nondischargeability under §523(a) can be attributed to a debtor who did not perform them, if the debtor was a “knowing active participant” in a scheme or conspiracy through which a third-party malefactor performed the acts.

Apply the law to the facts, the Rodenbaugh court held that to prove willfulness under Section 523(a)(6), the wife’s ex-employer was required to prove by a preponderance of the evidence either that the husband desired for the ex-employer to be harmed and thus conspired with the wife to this end OR that the husband knew of the wife’s crimes and schemed with her to this end despite substantial certainty that the ex-employer would suffer harm as a result of the wife’s actions.

Finally, the court rejected the ex-employer’s complaint objecting to the husband’s bankruptcy discharge. The court believed that the facts did not support a conclusion that the husband acted willfully. The court found that while the husband’s ambivalence to the family finances was likely reckless, there was insufficient facts to conclude that the husband’s actions rouse to the level of willful and maliciousness or that he conspired with his wife. Therefore, the husband was granted his bankruptcy discharge.
 
Warmest Regards,
Bob Schaller
Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Adversary Complaint to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(2)(A) Claim Rejected for Credit Card Cash Advances

In re Schempp, 420 B.R. 637 (Bankr. W.D.Pa 2009). A credit card lender filed a Section 523(a)(2)(A) adversary complaint against a Debtor who took two cash advances on debtor's credit card 165 days before filing bankruptcy. The credit card provider alleged debtor made an implied misrepresentation by taking the cash advances without the intent to repay.


Creditor attempted to prove its claim by offering as evidence: (a) debtor made only one installment payment; (b) debtor filed bankruptcy within 165 days of taking the cash advance; (c) debtor had a negative net worth and was substantially insolvent when debtor filed bankruptcy; and (d) debtor earned substantially less than debtor spent on a monthly basis when debtor filed for bankruptcy.



Debtor admitted experiencing financial difficulty when and after debtor obtained the cash advances, but the court found that this fact by itself did not demonstrate that debtor never intented to repay the cash advances. Next, debtor admitted that debtor had financial difficulties at the time the bankruptcy case was filed, but the court found that this fact and the presumed insolvency some 165 days before the bankruptcy filing, did not constitute conclusive evidence that debtor lacked an intent to repay, and thus a misrepresentation to creditor regarding debtor's intent to repay the cash advances.



The court held that a "subjective standard" rather than an objective standard must be utilized to ascertain whether a debtor had an intent to deceive (i.e. whether a debtor's representation that debtor intended to repay was false) for purposes of Section 523(a)(2)(A). Therefore, the court focused its attention upon whether debtor subjectively intended to repay the cash advances, not upon whether an objective person would have thought that he or she could repay said debt. Consequently, the court gave great weight to debtor's testimony that (a) debtor's income had decreased dramatically in the roughly one-year period prior to filing bankruptcy because of the decline in the real estate market; and (b) debtor nevertheless thought that debtor's income would improve so as to allow debtor to make installment payments on the cash advances.



Therefore, the court rejected creditor's claim and concluded that the alleged facts did not preponderantly prove the falsity of, or any deceptive intent on debtor's part with respect to, debtor's representation that debtor intended to repay the cash advances. Instead, the court concluded that is was at least equally likely that debtor (a) did not obtain the cash advances as part of a scheme to deceive creditor by accumulating debt on the the eve of bankruptcy without any intent to repay, and (b) was thus truthful when debtor implicitly represented to creditor that debtor intended to repay the cash advances.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm

Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities.

You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Adversary Complaint to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here

NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(2)(B) Claims Rejected Because Misrepresentation Not in Writing

In re Schempp, 420 B.R. 637 (Bankr. W.D.Pa 2009). A credit card lender filed a Section 523(a)(2)(B) adversary complaint against a Debtor who took two cash advances on debtor's credit card 165 days before filing bankruptcy. The credit card provider alleged debtor made an implied misrepresentation by taking the cash advances without the intent to repay.


In rejecting the lender's claim, the court noted that Section 523(a)(2)(B) pertains only to money obtained by debtor's use of a statement IN WRITING that is materially false respecting the debtor's or an insider's financial condition. The court's rejection was based upon (a) debtor's representations were NOT in writing; and (b) debtor's representations were NOT respecting debtor's financial condition.

 
Warmest Regards,
 
Bob Schaller
 
Your Bankruptcy Advisor
 
Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm
 
Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities.
 
You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Adversary Complaint to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.
 
For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here

NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(2)(B) Claims Must be Based Upon Writing

Section 523(a)(2)(B) excepts from discharge any debt for money, propety, services, or an extension, renewal, or refinancing of credit, to the extent obtained by false representation or fraud. To prove a Section 523(a)(2)(B) claim, a creditor must show the following: (1) debtor made a statement in writing; (2) that is materially false; (3) respectinng the debtor's or an insider's financial condition; (4) on which the creditor to whom the debtor is liable for such money reasonably relied; and (5) that the debtor caused to be made or published with intent to deceive.


Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm

Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities.

You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Adversary Complaint to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here

NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Debtor Collaterally Estopped from Relitigating Section 523(a)(6) Issue

In re Moore, 346 Fed.Appx. 321 (10th Cir. 2009). Debtor appealed the district court's judgment affirming the bankruptcy court's granting of summary judgment in favor of plaintiff on non-dischargeability adversary claim brought pursuant to Section 523(a)(6)'s willful and malicious standard. Debtor had been found liable prepetition to plaintiff in a California state civil proceeding for intentional infliction of emotional distress.


Consequently, the bankruptcy granted summary judgment against debtor because that court believed debtor was collaterally estopped from relitigating whether plaintiff's debt was the result of a willful and malicious injury. Therefore, the debt was deemed non-dischargeable pursuant to Section 523(a)(6).
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm
Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here

NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Plaintiff must Provide Evidence of Debtor's Conduct to Prove a Malicious Injury per Section 523(a)(6).

In re Powell, 423 B.R. 201 (Bankr. N.D.TX 2010). The court found that an adversary plaintiff seeking to deny debtor's discharge under Section 523(a)(6) must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, a willful and malicious injury by the debtor to plaintiff or plaintiff's property. The word "willfull" in Section 523(a)(6) modifies "injury" and, therefore, required plaintiff to prove "a deliberate or intentional act that leads to injury."


Following the Supreme Court's decision in Kawaauhau v. Geiger, 523 U.S. 57, 61 (1998), the court determined that either an objective substantial certainty of injury or a subjective motive to cause injury meets the Surpreme Court's definition of "willful" in Section 523(a)(6).

Then, the Powell court rejected plaintiff's claim because plaintiff failed to prove the underlying conduct from which debtor's intent could have been inferred. In fact, plaintiff offered no evidence to support the claim.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm
Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here

NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

What is a Malicious Injury per Section 523(a)(6)?

In re Ormsby, 591 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2010). The 9th Circuit found that a malicious injury involves (1) a wrongful act, (2) done intentionally, (3) which necessarily causes injury, and (4) is done without just cause or excuse. Malice may be inferred based on the nature of the wrongful act. To infer malice, however, it must first be established that the conversion was willful.


Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm
Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here

NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

When does a state court judgment for Larceny Satisfy Section 523(a)(4)?

In re Ormsby, 591 F.3d 1199 (9th Cir. 2010). The debtor argued that summary judgment was inappropriate because a state court judgement against debtor for larceny should not preclude debtor from contending that debtor did not commit larceny within the federal definition of the term. The 9th Circuit disagreed and held that summary judgment against debtor was appropriate because the state court judgment was sufficient to preclude relitigation of whether debtor's conduct meets the requirements of Section 523(a)(4).

The court cited Collier on Bankruptcy, which states that for purposes of Section 523(a)(4), a bankruptcy court is not bound by the state law definition of larceny but, rather, may follow federal common law, which defines larceny as a "felonious taking of another's personal property with intent to convert it or deprived the owner of the same."

The 9th Circuit determined that it was not bound to the state court's judgment. Nevertheless, the 9th Circuit found that the state court judgment provided enough information to determine that debtor's action amounted to fraud, since "intent may properly be inferred from the totality of the circumstances and the conduct of the person accused. Citing Kaye v. Rose (In re rose), 934 F.2d 901, 904 (7th Cir. 1991).
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor Blog

By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm
Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here

NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

When is a Creditor Justifiable Allowed to Rely on Fraudulent Misrepresentations per Section 523(a)(2)

In re Treadwell, 423 B.R. 309 (8th Cir. 2010). The 8th Circuit addressed the "creditor’s justifiable reliance" element of Section 523(a)(2) and noted that the Supreme Court has held that the standard to be applied to exceptions to discharge for actual fraud is "justifiable reliance," which is a lower standard than "reasonable reliance," and entails no duty to investigate.
However, it is true that the receipient of a fraudulent misrepresentation is not justified in relying upon its truth if the receipient knows that it is false or its falsity is obvious to the recipient. The Treadwell court found that the facts of the particular case did not involve obvious warning signs of falsity, and the bankruptcy court had found no evidence that an investigation would have unearthed proof of the fraud.
But, the court noted a "red flag" exception for extreme situations such as a one-eyed hourse or where a debtor tells the creditor he will not be able to repay his debt.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you.

Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here

NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

No Denial of Discharge Based on Vicarious Liability per Section 523(a)(2)

In re Treadwell, 423 B.R. 309 (8th Cir. 2010). The 8th



Circuit noted that it would be highly unusual to hold a debt


nondischargeable where the debtor is only vicariouisly


liable and had NOT participated in the underlying fraud.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor Blog

By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys.

For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here

NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Who has the burden of proof in an adversary proceeding?

The party seeking to bar a debtor from discharge under


Section 727 and concomitant "fresh start" has the burden of


proof. That party must articulate well-pleaded allegations


establishing the required elements for the denial of


discharge under one or more provision of the U.S. Bankruptcy


Code. The creditor or trustee objecting to a debtor’s


discharge carries the burden of proof because of the


draconian relief sought. The courts strictly construe


against objecting creditors and liberally construe in favor


of the debtor.



Exceptions to discharge under Section 523 must be similarly


construed so as to give maximum effect to the Code’s policy


of providing honest but unfortunate debtors with a "fresh


start." To sustain a cause of action under either §727 or


§523, the creditor must establish each element of the statue


by a preponderance of the evidence. Grogan v. Garner, 498


U.S. 279 (1991).
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor Blog

By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm
Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here

For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer.

I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 727(a)(6)(A): Failure to obey a court order

Section 727(a)(6)(A) provides that the court shall grant the


debtor a discharge, unless the debtor has refused to obey


any lawful order of the court, other than an order to


respond to a material question or to testify. Given the


plain language of the statute that debtor "refuse" to obey a


court order, it appears that "mere failure" to obey is


insufficient to justify the harsh sanction of denial of a


discharge imposed by §727. Consequently, discharge should


only be denied where the debtor’s noncompliance with a court


order was a result of willful, intentional disobedience or


dereliction rather than mere inadvertence or mistake.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor Blog

By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you.

Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here

For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer.

I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 727(a)(4)(B): False Claim

Section 727(a)(4)(B) prohibits the granting of a discharge


to a debtor who knowingly and fraudulently presented or used


a false claim in or in connection with a bankruptcy case.


This provision of the code is utilized infrequently. The


courts that have considered objections to discharge for


presenting a false claim have required the objecting party


to prove that the debtor presented or used an inflated or


fictitious claim. Such cases generally involve the


scheduling of non-existent debts, the scheduling of inflated


debts, or the filing by the debtor of a false proof of


claim.



A §727(a)(4)(B) violation requires both intentionality and


materiality to be actionable. At least one bankruptcy court


has denied a debtor’s discharge where the court found that


the overstatement of a secured claim was a material falsity


because it created a mistaken belief that the liens against


the debtor’s residence exceeded it fair market value.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor Blog

By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you.

Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here

For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 727(a)(4)(A): False Oath or Account

Section 727(a)(4)(A) provides that the court shall grant the


debtor a discharge, unless the debtor knowingly and


fraudulently, in or in connection with the case, made a


false oath or account. Examples of these false oaths


relating to the bankruptcy schedules include: understating


income, over stating expenses, intentionally omitting


assets, intentionally omitting debts owed to creditors, or


failing to identity fraudulent conveyances or preferential


transfers.



A party objecting to a debtor’s discharge must allege and


prove the following: (1) the debtor made a statement under


oath; the statement was false; (3) the debtor knew the


statement was false; (4) the statement was made with


fraudulent intent; and (5) the statement related materially


to the bankruptcy case.



Qualifying statements include statements in documents, such


as the bankruptcy schedules and statement of financial


affairs, filed with the petition and statements by the


debtor during examinations under oath---including the


Section 341 meeting of creditors.



Because a debtor is unlikely to admit having made a


deliberate misstatement, knowledge of falsity or fraudulent


intent may be found where the debtor acted with reckless


disregard for the truth. The requirement of materiality was


judicially created to ensure that debtors are not denied


discharge for inconsequential or technical misstatements. A


test for materiality is whether the false statement relates


to the debtor’s business transactions or estate or whether


it is pertinent to the discovery of assets or the existence


or disposition of property.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor Blog

By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you.

Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here

For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 727(a)(3): Failure to Produce Financial Records

Section 727(a)(3) states that the court shall grant the


debtor a discharge unless the debtor has concealed,


destroyed, mutilated, falsified, or failed to keep or


preserve any recorded information, including books,


documents, records, and papers, from which the debtor’s


financial condition or business transactions might be


ascertained, unless the failure to act was justified under


all of the circumstances of the case.



The purpose of §727(a)(3) is to give a creditor and the


court complete and accurate information concerning the


status of the debtor’s financial affairs and to test the


completeness of the disclosure requisite of a discharge. The


policy served by debtor’s disclosure obligations is to give


unsecured and undersecured creditors the ability to trace a


debtor’s financial history to determine whether they are


being treated fairly.



The elements of a §727(a)(3) claim that must be proved by a


preponderance of the evidence are as follow: (1) the


creditor must prove that the debtor failed to keep or


preserve records; and (2) such failure was not reasonably


under the circumstances and this failure makes it impossible


to ascertain the debtor’s true financial condition or


business transactions. All records that are necessary to


understand a debtor’s financial condition are within the


scope of this section. All books and materials which shed


light on what was done with a debtor’s bankruptcy estate and


the factors which led to the filing for relief are material


to a §727(a)(3) analysis.



In a personal bankruptcy case, the quintessential documents


that must be preserved and kept are debtor’s pay stubs and


tax returns. The debtor’s failure to provide bank and credit


card statements can also form the basis for denying a


discharge under §727(a)(3) since those documents form the


core of what is necessary to ascertain the debtor’s


financial condition, primarily debtor’s use of case assets.


The determination of whether a debtor has maintained


adequate records is particularly fact intensive and must be


determined on a case by case basis. Considerations relevant


to this determination include debtor’s occupation, financial


structure, education, experience, and sophistication.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you.

Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here

For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(6): Willful and malicious injury

Section 523(a)(6) prevents an individual debtor from


discharging any debt that is the result of willful and


malicious injury. The terms "willful" and "malicious" are


separate elements. An objecting creditor must prove both


elements in order for the discharge to be excepted.



Speaking to the "willful" element, the Supreme Court


specifically rejected a broad interpretation of the


exception by narrowly holding that "non-dischargeability


takes a deliberate or intentional injury, not merely a


deliberate act that leads to injury." Kawaaukau v. Geiger,


523 U.S. 57 (1998). The injury itself must be desired and in


fact anticipated by the debtor in order or for the debt to


be excepted from discharge. Thus, debts arising from


recklessly or negligently inflicted injuries do not fall


within the compass of §523(a)(6).



The term "malicious" refers to the debtor’s motivation in


committing the act and has been defined by the court to mean


wrongful and without just cause or excuse, even in the


absence of personal hatred, spite, or ill-will. Actual or


constructive malice will suffice and may be imputed to the


debtor in cases where a debtor seeks profit or some other


benefit only upon a finding of aggravated circumstances.


Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here

For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(4): Larceny

Section 523(a)(4) provides an exception to the general


discharge for a debtor who wrongfully takes the assets of an


objecting creditor. Larceny is distinguishable from


embezzlement because in larceny, the original taking of the


property must be unlawful. Where payments are lawfully


received pursuant to a contract, larceny cannot exist for


purposes of excepting a discharge.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller
Your Bankruptcy Advisor
Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here

For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(4): Embezzlement

Section 523(a)(4) provides an exception to the general


discharge for debtors who embezzle assets of an objecting


creditor. Courts look to the federal common law definition


of embezzlement for purposes of non-dischargeability as the


fraudulent appropriation of property by a person to whom


such property has been entrusted, or into whose hands it has


lawfully come.



To establish a claim of embezzlement under §523(a)(4), a


creditor must show that (1) property owned by another is


rightfully in the possession of debtor; (2) debtor’s


appropriation of such property to a use other than the use


for which the property was entrusted to debtor; and (3)


circumstances indicating fraudulent intent. Absent intent to


defraud, a debtor’s appropriation of funds does not arise to


the level of embezzlement.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(4): Fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity

Section 523(a)(4) provides an exception to the general discharge provisions. Pursuant to §523(a)(4), a discharge under Section 727 does not discharge an individual debtor from any debt for fraud or defalcation while acting in a fiduciary capacity. An objecting creditor must plead and prove the following to except debts from discharge: (1) debtor acted in a fiduciary relationship when the alleged wrongful acts giving rise to the objecting creditor’s claim occurred; and (2) debtor committed fraud or defalcation.


Defalcation requires a showing of conscious misbehavior or extreme recklessness. Such a standard ensures that the term defalcation complements but does not dilute the other terms of the provision --- fraud, embezzlement, and larceny –-- of which require a showing of actual wrongful intent.



Accordingly, this standard does not reach fiduciaries who may have failed to account for funds or property for which they were responsible only as a consequence of negligence, inadvertence or similar conduct not shown to be sufficiently culpable. With respect to the kind of conducts that constitute defalcation, bankruptcy courts have generally held that commingling, failing to account for, or misdirecting funds may suffice.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(2)(A): Fraud

Section 523(a)(2)(A) excepts for discharge any debt for money to the extent obtained by "actual fraud." The term “actual fraud” means common law fraud. A creditor must show that the debtor’s actions were purposefully deceptive or misleading. Courts infer requirements establishing intent, reliance and materiality.



To provide that a debtor committed "actual fraud," the objecting creditor must show the following: (1) a representation made by debtor to the objecting creditor; (2) debtor’s knowledge of the falsity when the representation was made; (3) debtor’s intent to deceive in making such representation; (4) creditor’s justifiable reliance; and (5) creditor’s damage as a result. A creditor must plead and prove each element of fraud in order to sustain a finding that a debt is nondischargeable, including intent on the part of the debtor to deceive at the time the debt was created.



For a breach of contract to result in a nondischargeable debt, the objecting party must prove that debtor misrepresented debtor’s intention to perform contractual duties, which may be inferred if the debtor failed to begin performance.



In cases involving contractor-debtors, there are generally two ways to prove fraud or misrepresentation. First, the creditor could show that the debtor entered into the contract with the intent of never complying with the terms; or second, the creditor could show that debtor intentionally misrepresented a material fact or qualification when soliciting or obtaining the work.



when determining whether a contractor committed fraud in connection with a construction project, the question pivots on whether during the negotiations the contractor induced the property owner into signing the contract by making material false representations, like promising to obtain the necessary permits or overstating the contractor’s qualifications. Substandard performance or a mere breach of the construction contract does not rise to the level of fraud necessary to except the debt from discharge.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(2)(A): False Representation

Section 523(a)(2)(A) excepts for discharge any debt for money to the extent obtained by false representation. A creditor must show that the debtor’s actions were purposefully deceptive or misleading. Courts infer requirements establishing intent, reliance and materiality.



To provide that a debtor acted by false representation, the objecting creditor must show the following: (1) debtor made an express false or misleading statement; (2) with the intent to deceive; (3) on which the creditor justifiable relied; and (4) in order to induce the creditor to turn over money or property to the debtor.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Section 523(a)(2)(A): False Pretenses

Section 523(a)(2)(A) excepts for discharge any debt for money to the extent obtained by false pretenses. A creditor must show that the debtor’s actions were purposefully deceptive or misleading. Courts infer requirements establishing intent, reliance and materiality.



To provide that a debtor acted by false pretenses, the objecting creditor must show the following: (1) an implied misrepresentation or conduct by the debtor; (2) promoted knowingly and willingly by debtor; (3) to create a contrived and misleading understanding of the transaction on the part of the objecting creditor; and (4) which wrongfully induced plaintiff to advance money, property, or credit to the debtor. The frauds covered by this concept are those which in fact involve moral turpitude or intentional wrong.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor

Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Is the attorney who represented me in the bankruptcy case required to represent me in the adversary lawsuit?

Debtors must offer an aggressive defense. Debtors must offer a defense if there is any hope of avoiding the loss of the bankruptcy discharge. But, the court system is stacked against debtors who fail to defend themselves or acts without the benefit of an attorney. On one hand, debtors are typically unschooled in bankruptcy law and unskilled in defending themselves. On the other hand, the creditor who files an adversary is typically represented by an experienced bankruptcy attorney who is schooled and skilled in the art of filing adversary lawsuits. The attorney against you studied the U.S.



So who should represent the debtor? Most debtors wrongly believe that the attorney who filed the underlying bankruptcy case would necessary also automatically represent the debtors in the adversary proceeding. Nevertheless, that is the assumption of most debtors. But, the bankruptcy case is a totally separate and different case from the adversary lawsuit filed against the debtor to deny the discharge. The attorney for the bankruptcy case is NOT required to represent the debtor in the adversary lawsuit. For example, Local Bankruptcy Rule 2090-5 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Illinois does NOT require the attorney who represented a debtor in bankruptcy case to also represent the same debtor in an adversary lawsuit.



Nevertheless, each debtor is urged to contact the attorney who represented that debtor in the underlying bankruptcy case to determine whether that attorney would also represent the debtor in defending against the adversary complaint. Each debtor is also urged to engage that same attorney for the adversary proceeding if the attorney did a good job in the underlying bankruptcy case. If not, debtors are urged to consider hiring a different attorney---like the Schaller Law Firm.
 
Warmest Regards,
 
Bob Schaller
 
Your Bankruptcy Advisor
 
Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

When must I respond to the adversary complaint?

ACT NOW! TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE! An adversary complaint is dangerous. A debtor who loses an adversary lawsuit would suffer permanent negative consequences. Debts for which the discharge is denied are debts that will remain owed for the remainder of your life, unless paid in full with any owed interest, fees, costs, and attorneys fees.



Debtors have only a short time to defend themselves---approximately 28 days! After that debtors are in jeopardy of a default judgment being entered against them and their bankruptcy discharged being DENIED OR REVOKED.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor
Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.

Can I ignore the adversary complaint filed against me and still receive my bankruptcy discharge?

No. Debtors should never ignore an adversary complaint filed against them. In essence, an adversary complaint is a lawsuit filed against a debtor seeking to deny that debtor’s bankruptcy discharge. That’s serious and harsh.



Failure to defend against the adversary complaint would be a disaster and would result in a default judgment being entered against the debtor, the denial of the “fresh start” discharge, and possibly a money judgment being entered against the debtor. It is never a good idea to ignore a lawsuit that has been filed against you.
 
Warmest Regards,

Bob Schaller

Your Bankruptcy Advisor Blog By: Attorney Robert Schaller (Bob's bio) of the Schaller Law Firm Click for Bankruptcy Lawyer Job Opportunities. You are invited to contact Attorney Schaller at 630-655-1233 or visit his website at Discharging Student Loans to learn about how the bankruptcy laws can help you. Bob is a member of the National Bankruptcy College Attorney Network, American Bankruptcy Institute and the National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys. For information about Chapter 7 bankruptcy Click Here
For information about Chapter 13 bankruptcy Click Here NOTE: Robert Schaller looks forward to the opportunity to talk with you about your legal issues. But please remember that all information on this blog is for advertising and general informational purposes only. Please read Bob's disclaimer. I recommend that you review a few other blogs that may be of interest to you. These blogs are identified in the right column and are set forth below: bankruptcy issues blog; bankruptcy and family law issues blog; bankruptcy and employment issues blog; adversary defense blog; and bankruptcy and student loan issues blog.