Consumer Bankruptcy Journal Summer 2016 | Page 35

NCBRC CASES IN REVIEW
In re Milan, 546 B.R. 187 (Bankr. D. Minn. March 1, 2016) (case no. 3:14-bk-34685;
adv. proc. no. 3:15-ap-3034), appeal filed, Case No. 16-6012 (8th Cir. B.A.P., filed
March 16, 2016).
Dischargeability of debt—Student loan debt under Code § 523(a)(8)—Status of
obligation as educational loan: A loan from a commercial lender to allow the
debtor to study for the bar exam was not an “educational benefit” under Code §
523(a)(8)(A)(ii), nor was the loan encompassed by § 523(a)(8)(A)(i) or 523(a)(8)(B), so
that the debt arising from the loan was dischargeable under § 523(a)(8). In re Campbell,
547 B.R. 49 (Bankr. E.D. N.Y., March 24, 2016) (case no. 1:14-bk-45990; adv. proc.
no. 1:15-ap-1038).
Proof of claim—Secured claim—Postpetition charges: The mortgage creditor's
claim for postpetition fees and expenses would be disallowed, and the creditor's claim
declared to have been paid in full, where over the term of the debtor's confirmed
Chapter 13 plan the trustee paid the original amount of the creditor's claim, but the
creditor applied the trustee's payments to pay property taxes before the principal of
the debt, in violation of the debtor's confirmed plan, resulting in an unexpected
balance remaining on the debt. In re Tavares, 547 B.R. 204 (Bankr. S.D. Tex., March
11, 2016) (case no. 1:10-bk-10739).
Property of the estate—Avoidance of lien impairing exemption: Although a
creditor's judgment was against the debtor's non-debtor spouse only, the debtor could
avoid the creditor's judgment lien under Code § 522(f)(1) because the lien attached to
the debtor's exempt homestead property and the property was community property
under California law and therefore was property of the estate. In re Obedian, 546 B.R.
409 (Bankr. C.D. Cal., March 1, 2016) (case no. 2:14-bk-24247).
Property of the estate—Avoidance of security interest under Code §
522(f)(1)(B): The Chapter 13 debtor's riding lawn mower, a "Murray Select" rearengine riding mower with a rotary blade that had one main function—to cut the
debtor's grass—and that could not be used to haul any serious weight or for any other
material tasks was an "appliance" under Code § 522(f)(4)(A)(iii) rather than a "lawn
tractor" within the meaning of § 522(f)(4)(B)(v). Accordingly, the riding mower was a
"household good" under § 522(f)(1)(B)(i), and, since the riding mower was exempt
under Mississippi law, the debtor could avoid the creditor's nonpossessory,
nonpurchase-money security interest in the mower under § 522(f)(1)(B). In re Evans, -- B.R. ---, 2016 WL 1238853 (Bankr. N.D. Miss., March 29, 2016) (case no. 1:15-bk13910).
©National Consumer Bankruptcy Rights Center
www.ncbrc.org
National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys

Summer 2016

CONSUMER BANKRUPTCY JOURNAL

35