.jpg)
Follow-up comments form Judge Bason from our last cdcbaa seminar
What is the best route to send a comment to Judge Bason?
>
> Dear Colleagues!
>
>
> Judge Bason, who was an excellent panelist at cdcbaa's last seminar wanted me to pass on his updated thoughts. These updates are specifically due to our membership's questions and concerns that were raised at the seminar itself:
>
>
> I'd be grateful if you'd let the CDCBAA members know the following correction:
>
>
> 1. First, contrary to what I believe I said at the seminar, I do NOT get a notification from the Clerk's office when a bankruptcy petition has been filed by someone who appears to
> be "ineligible" under 11 U.S.C. 109(g). In other words, it is generally up to parties to raise that issue.
>
>
> 2. Secondly, although there are several cases on my 5/1/12 calendar in which creditors are seeking relief under 11 U.S.C. 362(d)(4), none of them appeared to be suitable for the
> type of tentative ruling that I had in mind at the end of the seminar regarding hijacked case situations. That's probably just as well because it gives me a chance to confer with
> some of the other Bankruptcy Judges. So I am in the final stages of formulating my tentative rulings in a hijacked case scenerio.
>
>
>
>
>
> KEITH HIGGINBOTHAM
> 2012 cdcbaa President
>
The post was migrated from Yahoo.
Dear Colleagues!
Judge Bason, who was an excellent panelist at cdcbaa's last seminar wanted me to pass on his updated thoughts. These updates are specifically due to our membership's questions and concerns that were raised at the seminar itself:
I'd be grateful if you'd let the CDCBAA members know the following correction:
1. First, contrary to what I believe I said at the seminar, I do NOT get a notification from the Clerk's office when a bankruptcy petition has been filed by someone who appears to
be "ineligible" under 11 U.S.C. 109(g). In other words, it is generally up to parties to raise that issue.
2. Secondly, although there are several cases on my 5/1/12 calendar in which creditors are seeking relief under 11 U.S.C. 362(d)(4), none of them appeared to be suitable for the
type of tentative ruling that I had in mind at the end of the seminar regarding hijacked case situations. That's probably just as well because it gives me a chance to confer with
some of the other Bankruptcy Judges. So I am in the final stages of formulating my tentative rulings in a hijacked case scenerio.
KEITH HIGGINBOTHAM
2012 cdcbaa President
Dear Colleagues!
Judge Bason, who was an excellent panelist at cdcbaa's last seminar wanted me to pass on his updated thoughts. These updates are specifically due to our membership's questions and concerns that were raised at the seminar itself:
I'd be grateful if you'd let the CDCBAA members know the following correction:
1. First, contrary to what I believe I said at the seminar, I do NOT get a notification from the Clerk's office when a bankruptcy petition has been filed by someone who appears to
be "ineligible" under 11 U.S.C. 109(g). In other words, it is generally up to parties to raise that issue.
2. Secondly, although there are several cases on my 5/1/12 calendar in which creditors are seeking relief under 11 U.S.C. 362(d)(4), none of them appeared to be suitable for the
type of tentative ruling that I had in mind at the end of the seminar regarding hijacked case situations. That's probably just as well because it gives me a chance to confer with
some of the other Bankruptcy Judges. So I am in the final stages of formulating my tentative rulings in a hijacked case scenerio.
KEITH HIGGINBOTHAM
2012 cdcbaa President
The post was migrated from Yahoo.